Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [agile-usability] How do you unit test web interfaces?

Expand Messages
  • Bruce Rennie
    Hi Alain, One word: Watir. http://wtr.rubyforge.org/ Watir is Web application testing in Ruby . It allows you to create tests, programmed in Ruby, that
    Message 1 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
    • 0 Attachment

      Hi Alain,

       

      One word: Watir.

       

      http://wtr.rubyforge.org/

       

      Watir is “Web application testing in Ruby”. It allows you to create tests, programmed in Ruby, that exercise your application through the browser. It uses the DOM to access interface artifacts which can protect your tests from insignificant (moving a control) to semi-significant (changing the visual name of a control) changes to the interface.  On the down side, you need to know Ruby and it only works with IE (though I hear there’s a version under development for FF as well).

       

      There’s also a version called Watin that we’re trying out in our .Net environment.

       

      Cheers,

      /bruce

       

      From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Desilets, Alain
      Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 3:35 PM
      To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [agile-usability] How do you unit test web interfaces?

       

      Hi folks,

      I'm about to embark on two projects that will involve a lot of web development. I thought I would take this opportunity to try and upgrade my web testing bag of tricks by asking people on this list how they do it.

      While many Xpers believe that the presentation layer of an application should not be unit tested (cause they think it's too hard and/or it provides little added value over testing the model and the business logic that underlies the UI), I am of the firm opinion that every line of code should be unit tested, and that includes UI code.

      In the past, I have had good success testing the UI of non-web apps, by writing tests that programmatically control the various widgets directly (ex: someButton.click(), where someButton is the variable holding the button widget) instead of through black box scripting
      (ex: clickOnButtonWithCaption("Go"), where we hope the UI is currently displaying a button with that caption).

      But I couldn't find a way to make that kind of approach work for web apps, because I don't know how to get my hands on the variables that hold the widgets.

      So I resort to an approach where I issue CGI requests to the application (actually, I simulate issuing such requests, so I don't have to go through an actual web server), capture the output of the CGI script, then compare that to the expected HTML.

      I find this approach presents two major problems:

      Firstly, it only tests for single CGI requests. I can't easily test a chain of requests like, enter a key word in the search field, click on Go, then click on the first hits in the list.

      Secondly, it's too tightly coupled with the details of the presentation. For example, if I change the HTML template used throughout the app for generating HTML (i.e. the HTML that describes the common "container" inside which specific content is inserted), then all of my tests fail.

      I'm curious to see how people here do it and am looking forward to learning new tricks.

      ----
      Alain Désilets, MASc
      Agent de recherches/Research Officer
      Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
      NRC Institute for Information Technology

      alain.desilets@...
      Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
      Facsimile/télécopieur: (613) 952-7151

      Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
      Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
      National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
      K1A 0R6

      Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada


      ----
      Alain Désilets, MASc
      Agent de recherches/Research Officer
      Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
      NRC Institute for Information Technology

      alain.desilets@...
      Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
      Facsimile/télécopieur: (613) 952-7151

      Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
      Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
      National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
      K1A 0R6

      Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada

    • Landes Eric (RBNA/CIT2.2)
      If you are using asp.net, there is an nunitasp out there (http://nunitasp.sourceforge.net/) that extends nunit to test web pages in much the manner you
      Message 2 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        If you are using asp.net, there is an nunitasp out there (http://nunitasp.sourceforge.net/) that extends nunit to test web pages in much the manner you describe.  I'm not sure about other options for CGI. 
         

        Eric Landes

        Microsoft MVP

        Editor Crystal Alliance (http://aspalliance.com/crystal)

        http://www.aspadvice.com/blogs/elandes (My Blog)

         


        From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Desilets, Alain
        Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 3:35 PM
        To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [agile-usability] How do you unit test web interfaces?

        Hi folks,

        I'm about to embark on two projects that will involve a lot of web development. I thought I would take this opportunity to try and upgrade my web testing bag of tricks by asking people on this list how they do it.

        While many Xpers believe that the presentation layer of an application should not be unit tested (cause they think it's too hard and/or it provides little added value over testing the model and the business logic that underlies the UI), I am of the firm opinion that every line of code should be unit tested, and that includes UI code.

        In the past, I have had good success testing the UI of non-web apps, by writing tests that programmatically control the various widgets directly (ex: someButton.click( ), where someButton is the variable holding the button widget) instead of through black box scripting
        (ex: clickOnButtonWithCa ption("Go" ), where we hope the UI is currently displaying a button with that caption).

        But I couldn't find a way to make that kind of approach work for web apps, because I don't know how to get my hands on the variables that hold the widgets.

        So I resort to an approach where I issue CGI requests to the application (actually, I simulate issuing such requests, so I don't have to go through an actual web server), capture the output of the CGI script, then compare that to the expected HTML.

        I find this approach presents two major problems:

        Firstly, it only tests for single CGI requests. I can't easily test a chain of requests like, enter a key word in the search field, click on Go, then click on the first hits in the list.

        Secondly, it's too tightly coupled with the details of the presentation. For example, if I change the HTML template used throughout the app for generating HTML (i.e. the HTML that describes the common "container" inside which specific content is inserted), then all of my tests fail.

        I'm curious to see how people here do it and am looking forward to learning new tricks.

        ----
        Alain Désilets, MASc
        Agent de recherches/Research Officer
        Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
        NRC Institute for Information Technology

        alain.desilets@ nrc-cnrc. gc.ca
        Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
        Facsimile/télé copieur: (613) 952-7151

        Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
        Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
        National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
        K1A 0R6

        Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada


        ----
        Alain Désilets, MASc
        Agent de recherches/Research Officer
        Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
        NRC Institute for Information Technology

        alain.desilets@ nrc-cnrc. gc.ca
        Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
        Facsimile/télé copieur: (613) 952-7151

        Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
        Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
        National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
        K1A 0R6

        Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada

      • Pascal Roy
        Alain, You can use Selenium for Unit Testing your UI. The nice thing about it is that you can also use Selenium to do acceptance testing. For unit testing, you
        Message 3 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Alain,

          You can use Selenium for Unit Testing your UI. The nice thing about it is that you can also use Selenium to do acceptance testing.

          For unit testing, you would use Selenium RC (for Remote Control)). Basically, Selenum RC which includes a server component gives you programmatic control of  the browser accessing the application under test (actually, Selenium Core which is an embedded javascript engine) using your favorite language (java, C#, VB#.NET,...). It supports a few languages but  it's fairly easy to implement the necessary front end if yours is not in the list.
          For acceptance testing, we typically write the tests in Selanese through Selenium IDE which is an IDE for writing acceptance tests in Selanese. It provides interesting facilities including recording your actions in selanese so you can run your test scripts back later on.

          It all works pretty well, and it's from the guys at ThoughtWorks...  Oh yes, it also supports Ajax if you are into that sort of thing...

          Pascal Roy, ing./P.Eng., PMP
          Vice-Président/Vice President
          Elapse Technologies inc.

          [url]        www.elapsetech.com
          [email]]  pascal.roy@...
          [cell]       514-862-6836


          Le 07-04-23 à 15:34, Desilets, Alain a écrit :

          Hi folks,

          I'm about to embark on two projects that will involve a lot of web development. I thought I would take this opportunity to try and upgrade my web testing bag of tricks by asking people on this list how they do it.

          While many Xpers believe that the presentation layer of an application should not be unit tested (cause they think it's too hard and/or it provides little added value over testing the model and the business logic that underlies the UI), I am of the firm opinion that every line of code should be unit tested, and that includes UI code.

          In the past, I have had good success testing the UI of non-web apps, by writing tests that programmatically control the various widgets directly (ex: someButton.click(), where someButton is the variable holding the button widget) instead of through black box scripting
          (ex: clickOnButtonWithCaption("Go"), where we hope the UI is currently displaying a button with that caption).

          But I couldn't find a way to make that kind of approach work for web apps, because I don't know how to get my hands on the variables that hold the widgets.

          So I resort to an approach where I issue CGI requests to the application (actually, I simulate issuing such requests, so I don't have to go through an actual web server), capture the output of the CGI script, then compare that to the expected HTML.

          I find this approach presents two major problems:

          Firstly, it only tests for single CGI requests. I can't easily test a chain of requests like, enter a key word in the search field, click on Go, then click on the first hits in the list.

          Secondly, it's too tightly coupled with the details of the presentation. For example, if I change the HTML template used throughout the app for generating HTML (i.e. the HTML that describes the common "container" inside which specific content is inserted), then all of my tests fail.

          I'm curious to see how people here do it and am looking forward to learning new tricks.

          ----
          Alain Désilets, MASc
          Agent de recherches/Research Officer
          Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
          NRC Institute for Information Technology

          alain.desilets@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
          Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
          Facsimile/télécopieur: (613) 952-7151

          Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
          Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
          National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
          K1A 0R6

          Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada


          ----
          Alain Désilets, MASc
          Agent de recherches/Research Officer
          Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
          NRC Institute for Information Technology

          alain.desilets@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
          Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
          Facsimile/télécopieur: (613) 952-7151

          Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
          Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
          National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
          K1A 0R6

          Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada


        • Phlip
          ... That is a Customer Test system. The best unit tests leave out extraneous units, such as web servers and browsers. The best possible way to learn unit
          Message 4 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Bruce Rennie wrote:

            > Hi Alain,

            > One word: Watir.

            That is a Customer Test system. The best unit tests leave out
            extraneous units, such as web servers and browsers.

            The best possible way to learn unit testing for any web project is to
            study how Ruby on Rails does it.

            Warning: Once you learn Rails, going back to Brand X will be very hard.

            --
            Phlip
            http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/9780596510657/
            "Test Driven Ajax (on Rails)
            assert_xpath, assert_javascript, & assert_ajax
          • George Dinwiddie
            ... As Bruce points out, there s WATIR (and WATIJ and some others) for allowing your tests to drive the browser. There HttpUnit, JwebUnit, and such for
            Message 5 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Desilets, Alain wrote:
              > But I couldn't find a way to make that kind of approach work for web
              > apps, because I don't know how to get my hands on the variables that
              > hold the widgets.

              As Bruce points out, there's WATIR (and WATIJ and some others) for
              allowing your tests to drive the browser. There HttpUnit, JwebUnit, and
              such for simulating a browser and interacting with your application.

              > Secondly, it's too tightly coupled with the details of the
              > presentation. For example, if I change the HTML template used
              > throughout the app for generating HTML (i.e. the HTML that describes
              > the common "container" inside which specific content is inserted),
              > then all of my tests fail.

              If you're going to check particular things in the HTML, I recommend
              using XPath expressions to reduce the fragility of your assertions. You
              can take a look at http://idiacomputing.com/moin/HtmlTestingUsingXpath
              to see how I used XPath expressions with HttpUnit tests.

              - George

              --
              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
              * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
              Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
              Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
            • Todd Moy
              I actually asked this very same question to one of my friends a few months back. He steered me toward Selenium too. From my light use of it, Selenium seems to
              Message 6 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                I actually asked this very same question to one of my friends a few months back. He steered me toward Selenium too. From my light use of it, Selenium seems to be a very approachable and easy way to test UIs. You can record actions, or program the test directly if you are so inclined.

                Another cool thing is that it can integrate with Fitnesse, a wiki-based testing framework. The nice part about this is that you have a more direct relationship to the documentation / requirements and the tests. Of course there's also a corollary benefit of being able to expose your tests readily through the wiki.

                -TM


                On 4/23/07, Phlip <phlip2005@...> wrote:

                Bruce Rennie wrote:

                > Hi Alain,

                > One word: Watir.

                That is a Customer Test system. The best unit tests leave out
                extraneous units, such as web servers and browsers.

                The best possible way to learn unit testing for any web project is to
                study how Ruby on Rails does it.

                Warning: Once you learn Rails, going back to Brand X will be very hard.

                --
                Phlip
                http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/9780596510657/
                "Test Driven Ajax (on Rails)
                assert_xpath, assert_javascript, & assert_ajax




                --
                ____________________________
                oombrella | User Experience Design
                http://www.oombrella.com
                oombrella /a/ gmail.com
              • Phlip
                ... ... None of these are for _unit_ tests. Please write as many tests as possible to the HTML layer, or lower, for best results. Don t be fooled by pretty
                Message 7 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Todd Moy wrote:

                  > I actually asked this very same question to one of my friends a few months back. He steered me toward Selenium too. From my light use of it, Selenium seems to be a very approachable and easy way to test UIs. You can record actions, or program the test directly if you are so inclined.
                  >
                  > Another cool thing is that it can integrate with Fitnesse
                  ...

                  None of these are for _unit_ tests. Please write as many tests as
                  possible to the HTML layer, or lower, for best results. Don't be
                  fooled by pretty special effects.

                  --
                  Phlip
                  http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!
                • Håkan Reis
                  Talking about Watir... for asp.net there is also WatiN. http://watin.sourceforge.net/ I havent tested it in a real project but it looks simple enough. --
                  Message 8 of 22 , Apr 23, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Talking about Watir... for asp.net there is also WatiN. http://watin.sourceforge.net/
                    I havent tested it in a real project but it looks simple enough.

                    --
                    Håkan Reis
                    Dotway AB

                    http://blog.reis.se
                  • Desilets, Alain
                    BTW, thanks for all the excellent leads folks. You ve given me a couple of days of investigation to do at least (hum... Not sure I should be thankful after all
                    Message 9 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      BTW, thanks for all the excellent leads folks. You've given me a couple
                      of days of investigation to do at least (hum... Not sure I should be
                      thankful after all ;-), just kiddig of course).

                      > > I actually asked this very same question to one of my
                      > friends a few months back. He steered me toward Selenium too.
                      > From my light use of it, Selenium seems to be a very
                      > approachable and easy way to test UIs. You can record
                      > actions, or program the test directly if you are so inclined.
                      > >
                      > > Another cool thing is that it can integrate with Fitnesse
                      > ...
                      >
                      > None of these are for _unit_ tests. Please write as many
                      > tests as possible to the HTML layer, or lower, for best
                      > results. Don't be fooled by pretty special effects.

                      Phlip, can you explain more precisely what you mean by "writing a test
                      to the HTML layer or lower". I think I know what you mean, but want to
                      be sure.

                      Alain
                    • Phlip
                      ... Convince your HTML generating modules to generate HTML as if a web browser had called them. Then use the XPath query technique to reach into the HTML and
                      Message 10 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > > None of these are for _unit_ tests. Please write as many
                        > > tests as possible to the HTML layer, or lower, for best
                        > > results. Don't be fooled by pretty special effects.
                        >
                        > Phlip, can you explain more precisely what you mean by "writing a test
                        > to the HTML layer or lower". I think I know what you mean, but want to
                        > be sure.

                        Convince your HTML generating modules to generate HTML as if a web
                        browser had called them. Then use the XPath query technique to reach
                        into the HTML and look for details. This probably covers that:

                        http://idiacomputing.com/moin/HtmlTestingUsingXpath

                        --
                        Phlip
                        http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!
                      • Phlip
                        ... server ... ! -- Phlip http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand
                        Message 11 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > Convince your HTML generating modules to generate HTML as if a web

                          server

                          > had called them. Then use the XPath query technique to reach
                          > into the HTML and look for details. This probably covers that:
                          >
                          > http://idiacomputing.com/moin/HtmlTestingUsingXpath

                          !

                          --
                          Phlip
                          http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!
                        • Brian Marick
                          ... I have something of an example here, using the Atomic Object s variant of whatever-Martin-Fowler-calls-Model/View/Presenter-these-days:
                          Message 12 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Apr 24, 2007, at 8:29 AM, Desilets, Alain wrote:

                            > Phlip, can you explain more precisely what you mean by "writing a test
                            > to the HTML layer or lower". I think I know what you mean, but want to
                            > be sure.

                            I have something of an example here, using the Atomic Object's
                            variant of whatever-Martin-Fowler-calls-Model/View/Presenter-these-days:

                            <http://www.testing.com/cgi-bin/blog/2007/01/05#wireframe2>
                            <http://www.testing.com/cgi-bin/blog/2007/01/11#wireframe3>
                            <http://www.testing.com/cgi-bin/blog/2007/01/18#wireframe4>

                            This example assumes a non-HTML app, but I plan to repurpose it to
                            HTML to show that's tractable. (Haven't started that yet.) The idea
                            of MVP (note: different than MVC) is to make the view very thin and
                            put all the view smarts ("when text is entered in this text box, make
                            that button visible") into a layer below it. The first link is to a
                            movie that explains the Atomic Object style, which uses the Observer
                            pattern heavily.

                            See also Mike Feather's "Humble Dialog Box":
                            <http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/TheHumbleDialogBox.pdf>

                            The Atomic Object style uses mocks heavily. I was a little surprised
                            to find myself deviating from that. What happened is that I found
                            that business-facing tests written as annotated wireframes (and used
                            Fit as an execution engine) seemed like just as good a way to test-
                            drive the presenter layer, and less work besides.

                            I need to get back to that project. So many opportunities to
                            experiment, so little time...

                            -----
                            Brian Marick, independent consultant
                            Mostly on agile methods with a testing slant
                            www.exampler.com, www.exampler.com/blog
                          • Desilets, Alain
                            OK, thx. That was the next step up I was thinking of taking, i.e. instead of just diffing the HTML against a known past output, just assert that the HTML
                            Message 13 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              OK, thx. That was the next step up I was thinking of taking, i.e.
                              instead of just diffing the HTML against a known past output, just
                              assert that the HTML contains specific things I am expecting to find.

                              This would certainly address my first problem (i.e. all my tests failing
                              as soon as the HTML container is changed).

                              But what about the other issue I was raising, i.e. the fact that you are
                              not testing pathes through various HTML pages.

                              In the past, I have been burned badly by this. For example, I would have
                              one HTML page whose URL was:

                              http://www.somewhere.com/cgi-bin/a-script.cgi

                              that was supposed to have a link to a page with URL:

                              http://www.somewhere.com/cgi-bin/another-script.cgi?some-argument=1

                              I would test that both the a-script.cgi and
                              another-script.cgi?some-argument=1 pages produced the expected HTML.

                              Then, I would refactor the name of the argument to another-script, so
                              that its URL would be:

                              http://www.somewhere.com/cgi-bin/another-script.cgi?refactored-argument-
                              name=1

                              My tests would all run fine, but when I would test interactively
                              (something I found myself doing far too often), I would realize that the
                              first HTML now had a dead link that pointed nowhere known.

                              I guess with the Xpath approach, this is less likely to happen, because
                              I can define some variable which all tests can access, which says
                              something like this:

                              my $argument_name = 'some-argument';

                              And use that in my assertions.

                              Are there other common pitfalls and ways to avoid them?

                              Alain

                              > -----Original Message-----
                              > From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                              > [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Phlip
                              > Sent: April 24, 2007 11:17 AM
                              > To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                              > Subject: Re: [agile-usability] How do you unit test web interfaces?
                              >
                              > > > None of these are for _unit_ tests. Please write as many
                              > > tests
                              > > as possible to the HTML layer, or lower, for best >
                              > results. Don't be
                              > > fooled by pretty special effects.
                              > >
                              > > Phlip, can you explain more precisely what you mean by "writing a
                              > > test to the HTML layer or lower". I think I know what you
                              > mean, but
                              > > want to be sure.
                              >
                              > Convince your HTML generating modules to generate HTML as if
                              > a web browser had called them. Then use the XPath query
                              > technique to reach into the HTML and look for details. This
                              > probably covers that:
                              >
                              > http://idiacomputing.com/moin/HtmlTestingUsingXpath
                              >
                              > --
                              > Phlip
                              > http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                            • George Dinwiddie
                              Alain, What is the focus of your testing? Are you trying to determine if a given query produces the correct output? Or are you trying to test a Use Case
                              Message 14 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Alain,

                                What is the focus of your testing? Are you trying to determine if a
                                given query produces the correct output? Or are you trying to test a
                                Use Case through a series of interactions with the system?

                                - George

                                Desilets, Alain wrote:
                                > OK, thx. That was the next step up I was thinking of taking, i.e.
                                > instead of just diffing the HTML against a known past output, just
                                > assert that the HTML contains specific things I am expecting to find.
                                >
                                > This would certainly address my first problem (i.e. all my tests failing
                                > as soon as the HTML container is changed).
                                >
                                > But what about the other issue I was raising, i.e. the fact that you are
                                > not testing pathes through various HTML pages.
                                >
                                > In the past, I have been burned badly by this. For example, I would have
                                > one HTML page whose URL was:
                                >
                                > http://www.somewhere.com/cgi-bin/a-script.cgi
                                >
                                > that was supposed to have a link to a page with URL:
                                >
                                > http://www.somewhere.com/cgi-bin/another-script.cgi?some-argument=1
                                >
                                > I would test that both the a-script.cgi and
                                > another-script.cgi?some-argument=1 pages produced the expected HTML.
                                >
                                > Then, I would refactor the name of the argument to another-script, so
                                > that its URL would be:
                                >
                                > http://www.somewhere.com/cgi-bin/another-script.cgi?refactored-argument-
                                > name=1
                                >
                                > My tests would all run fine, but when I would test interactively
                                > (something I found myself doing far too often), I would realize that the
                                > first HTML now had a dead link that pointed nowhere known.
                                >
                                > I guess with the Xpath approach, this is less likely to happen, because
                                > I can define some variable which all tests can access, which says
                                > something like this:
                                >
                                > my $argument_name = 'some-argument';
                                >
                                > And use that in my assertions.
                                >
                                > Are there other common pitfalls and ways to avoid them?
                                >
                                > Alain
                                >
                                >> -----Original Message-----
                                >> From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                                >> [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Phlip
                                >> Sent: April 24, 2007 11:17 AM
                                >> To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                                >> Subject: Re: [agile-usability] How do you unit test web interfaces?
                                >>
                                >>> > None of these are for _unit_ tests. Please write as many
                                >> > tests
                                >>> as possible to the HTML layer, or lower, for best >
                                >> results. Don't be
                                >>> fooled by pretty special effects.
                                >>>
                                >>> Phlip, can you explain more precisely what you mean by "writing a
                                >>> test to the HTML layer or lower". I think I know what you
                                >> mean, but
                                >>> want to be sure.
                                >> Convince your HTML generating modules to generate HTML as if
                                >> a web browser had called them. Then use the XPath query
                                >> technique to reach into the HTML and look for details. This
                                >> probably covers that:
                                >>
                                >> http://idiacomputing.com/moin/HtmlTestingUsingXpath
                                >>
                                >> --
                                >> Phlip
                                >> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >> Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >


                                --
                                ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
                                Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
                                Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
                                ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                              • Desilets, Alain
                                ... Both. In some case, I may even need to test that the javascript embedded in the HTML is working properly. Alain
                                Message 15 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  > Alain,
                                  >
                                  > What is the focus of your testing? Are you trying to
                                  > determine if a given query produces the correct output? Or
                                  > are you trying to test a Use Case through a series of
                                  > interactions with the system?

                                  Both.

                                  In some case, I may even need to test that the javascript embedded in
                                  the HTML is working properly.

                                  Alain
                                • George Dinwiddie
                                  ... This all sounds rather far from the concept of unit testing as defined in Test Driven Development. It sounds more like acceptance or customer testing, to
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Apr 24, 2007
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Desilets, Alain wrote:
                                    >> Alain,
                                    >>
                                    >> What is the focus of your testing? Are you trying to
                                    >> determine if a given query produces the correct output? Or
                                    >> are you trying to test a Use Case through a series of
                                    >> interactions with the system?
                                    >
                                    > Both.
                                    >
                                    > In some case, I may even need to test that the javascript embedded in
                                    > the HTML is working properly.

                                    This all sounds rather far from the concept of unit testing as defined
                                    in Test Driven Development. It sounds more like acceptance or customer
                                    testing, to me. For that, one of the tools to run a real browser (like
                                    WATIR) is probably the way to go. I'd ask on the agile-testing list. I
                                    think that you'll get better results, though, if you think through what
                                    you're trying to accomplish. "Testing everything" at the GUI is not
                                    often a very productive strategy.

                                    If you're trying to TDD the gui, then you'll find that a variety of
                                    tools are needed, as there is no SwissArmyUnit(tm) tool that does
                                    everything. For TDDing javascript, I've found jsUnit useful.

                                    - George

                                    --
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
                                    Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
                                    Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  • Desilets, Alain
                                    ... I agree that testing pathes through several pages is acceptance testing, not unit testing. But I think testing the behaviour of a single web page
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Apr 25, 2007
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      > > In some case, I may even need to test that the javascript
                                      > embedded in
                                      > > the HTML is working properly.
                                      >
                                      > This all sounds rather far from the concept of unit testing
                                      > as defined in Test Driven Development.
                                      > It sounds more like
                                      > acceptance or customer testing, to me.


                                      I agree that testing pathes through several pages is acceptance testing,
                                      not unit testing.

                                      But I think testing the behaviour of a single web page (including the
                                      behaviour of it's embedded JavaScript code) fits the definition of unit
                                      testing.

                                      In any case, I have never worried too much about whether I am doing unit
                                      or acceptance testing. I always do both, usually at the same time, and
                                      often in the same TestCase files (the later being practice I am trying
                                      to move away from).

                                      > For that, one of the
                                      > tools to run a real browser (like
                                      > WATIR) is probably the way to go. I'd ask on the
                                      > agile-testing list. I think that you'll get better results,
                                      > though, if you think through what you're trying to
                                      > accomplish. "Testing everything" at the GUI is not often a
                                      > very productive strategy.

                                      Thanks for the agile testing hint. I'll post something there (I didn't
                                      know that list existed).

                                      I'm not thinking about testing everything at the GUI level. I always
                                      have more internal tests that check the internals independantly of the
                                      GUI.

                                      But the Gui is code too, and it therefore needs to be tested. I'm
                                      looking for a better way to test it than I have been doing in the past.

                                      > If you're trying to TDD the gui, then you'll find that a
                                      > variety of tools are needed, as there is no SwissArmyUnit(tm)
                                      > tool that does everything. For TDDing javascript, I've found
                                      > jsUnit useful.

                                      Yes, I know. Some collegues and I are currently developing a library of
                                      "manipulators" for wxPython, to make it easier to programmatically
                                      manipulate widgets in a wxPython application for the purpose of unit
                                      testing. I'm surprised we had to write that ourselves.


                                      Alain
                                    • George Dinwiddie
                                      ... It fits *some* definitions of unit testing, but not the one I generally use. I generally use the TDD concept of unit testing, rather than the ones
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Apr 25, 2007
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Desilets, Alain wrote:
                                        > But I think testing the behaviour of a single web page (including the
                                        > behaviour of it's embedded JavaScript code) fits the definition of unit
                                        > testing.

                                        It fits *some* definitions of unit testing, but not the one I generally
                                        use. I generally use the TDD concept of unit testing, rather than the
                                        ones generally accepted by the testing community. I don't call anything
                                        "unit testing" if it requires deployment to run.

                                        The overloading of the term "unit testing" has lead me to prefer
                                        "programmer testing" instead.

                                        > Thanks for the agile testing hint. I'll post something there (I didn't
                                        > know that list existed).
                                        >
                                        > I'm not thinking about testing everything at the GUI level. I always
                                        > have more internal tests that check the internals independantly of the
                                        > GUI.
                                        >
                                        > But the Gui is code too, and it therefore needs to be tested. I'm
                                        > looking for a better way to test it than I have been doing in the past.

                                        Yes, and you'll find a good community of testing professionals over
                                        there who will give you good testing advice. There's also a few of us
                                        developers there, who tend to look at things from the "TDD as a design
                                        tool" point of view.

                                        - George

                                        --
                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
                                        Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
                                        Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      • Desilets, Alain
                                        ... I don t really want to argue about the definition of unit vs acceptance testing. I agree with you that testing which requires deployment sucks, especially
                                        Message 19 of 22 , Apr 25, 2007
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          > Desilets, Alain wrote:
                                          > > But I think testing the behaviour of a single web page
                                          > (including the
                                          > > behaviour of it's embedded JavaScript code) fits the definition of
                                          > > unit testing.
                                          >
                                          > It fits *some* definitions of unit testing, but not the one I
                                          > generally use. I generally use the TDD concept of unit
                                          > testing, rather than the ones generally accepted by the
                                          > testing community. I don't call anything "unit testing" if
                                          > it requires deployment to run.

                                          I don't really want to argue about the definition of unit vs acceptance testing.

                                          I agree with you that testing which requires deployment sucks, especially if it's manual deployment. I'm looking for tools and techniques that will allow me to do automated testing (whether it be unit or acceptance) of the GUI without requiring too much in the way of deployment. It seems to me that testing the embedded javascript should be possible without full deployment. For example, invoke the script that generates the HTML containing that javascript, then load that HTML into some kind of browser emulator that has a JavaScript interpretor, etc... Dunno if that exists or not.


                                          ----
                                          Alain Désilets, MASc
                                          Agent de recherches/Research Officer
                                          Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
                                          NRC Institute for Information Technology

                                          alain.desilets@...
                                          Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
                                          Facsimile/télécopieur: (613) 952-7151

                                          Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
                                          Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
                                          National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
                                          K1A 0R6

                                          Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada
                                        • Desilets, Alain
                                          ... Thx Brian. I ll have a look. ... Right. When I test non-web GUIs, that s the approach I use. Except that contrarily to Mike, I don t use a MockView. I find
                                          Message 20 of 22 , Apr 25, 2007
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            > I have something of an example here, using the Atomic
                                            > Object's variant of
                                            > whatever-Martin-Fowler-calls-Model/View/Presenter-these-days:
                                            >
                                            > <http://www.testing.com/cgi-bin/blog/2007/01/05#wireframe2>
                                            > <http://www.testing.com/cgi-bin/blog/2007/01/11#wireframe3>
                                            > <http://www.testing.com/cgi-bin/blog/2007/01/18#wireframe4>
                                            >
                                            > This example assumes a non-HTML app, but I plan to repurpose
                                            > it to HTML to show that's tractable. (Haven't started that
                                            > yet.) The idea of MVP (note: different than MVC) is to make
                                            > the view very thin and put all the view smarts ("when text is
                                            > entered in this text box, make that button visible") into a
                                            > layer below it. The first link is to a movie that explains
                                            > the Atomic Object style, which uses the Observer pattern heavily.

                                            Thx Brian. I'll have a look.

                                            >
                                            > See also Mike Feather's "Humble Dialog Box":
                                            > <http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/TheHumbleDialo
                                            > gBox.pdf>

                                            Right. When I test non-web GUIs, that's the approach I use. Except that contrarily to Mike, I don't use a MockView. I find it's just as easy to test using the actual graphical view. And doing it that way catches all sort of silly little bugs in the view. Things like a button not being properly wired to the model method it's supposed to invoke.

                                            I haven't figured out how to do this in a web context though, hence my post.


                                            ----
                                            Alain Désilets, MASc
                                            Agent de recherches/Research Officer
                                            Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
                                            NRC Institute for Information Technology

                                            alain.desilets@...
                                            Tél/Tel (613) 990-2813
                                            Facsimile/télécopieur: (613) 952-7151

                                            Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montréal,
                                            Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
                                            National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
                                            K1A 0R6

                                            Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada
                                          • George Dinwiddie
                                            ... If you want to test just the javascript, put it in a .js file and test it with jsUnit. -- ... * George Dinwiddie *
                                            Message 21 of 22 , Apr 25, 2007
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Desilets, Alain wrote:
                                              > I agree with you that testing which requires deployment sucks,
                                              > especially if it's manual deployment. I'm looking for tools and
                                              > techniques that will allow me to do automated testing (whether it be
                                              > unit or acceptance) of the GUI without requiring too much in the way
                                              > of deployment. It seems to me that testing the embedded javascript
                                              > should be possible without full deployment. For example, invoke the
                                              > script that generates the HTML containing that javascript, then load
                                              > that HTML into some kind of browser emulator that has a JavaScript
                                              > interpretor, etc... Dunno if that exists or not.

                                              If you want to test just the javascript, put it in a .js file and test
                                              it with jsUnit.

                                              --
                                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
                                              Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
                                              Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
                                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.