- From: Wilhelm Joys Andersen <w@wja.no>
- Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 15:46:33 +0100
- To: James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>
- Cc: "<public-test-infra@w3.org>" <public-test-infra@w3.org>
James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>: > I am fine with automating the manual tests using webdriver, although we > should enforce the requirement that they can still be run without webdriver > for situations in which it is not available. Agreed. A good example of this approach can be found in the old (anno 2009) Opera test suite for forms[*], released to the public just a few days ago. Each assertion has its own manual test like these: https://github.com/operasoftware/presto-testo/tree/master/core/standards/wf1-watir2/interactive They contain clear pass conditions that can be understood and evaluated by humans. This is particularly useful when debugging a failing test. Then, building on top of this, is an array of automated tests: https://github.com/operasoftware/presto-testo/tree/master/core/standards/wf1-watir2/elements These load the manual tests in sequence and perform exactly the same actions as a human would. Tests are grouped into test suites in the same way as you would using testharness.js. The legacy test suite linked above uses the Watir2 API, which predates the WebDriver standardization, but the same principles apply. [*]: In case the label “WF1” confuses you - the mentioned legacy test suite covered the subset of HTML form features that were also present in HTML4, but all assertions are based on the 2009 HTML5 spec prose. :) -- Wilhelm Joys Andersen http://wja.no/
Received on Monday, 10 February 2014 14:47:24 UTC