6 messages in com.canoo.lists.webtestRe:[Webtest] Proposals
FromSent OnAttachments
Oliver Scheel21 Feb 2005 04:46 
Dierk Koenig21 Feb 2005 05:01 
Oliver Scheel21 Feb 2005 07:32 
Denis N. Antonioli21 Feb 2005 14:33 
Oliver Scheel22 Feb 2005 03:16 
ka...@hallo.ms22 Feb 2005 07:33 
Subject:Re:[Webtest] Proposals
From:Oliver Scheel (os@webinspace.de)
Date:02/21/2005 07:32:19 AM
List:com.canoo.lists.webtest

Hi,

Can you provide an example test that motivates the use of parameter injection?

yes, for instance:

- JavaScript-Problems that you have to work around, until supported by HTMLUnit (see other mail) - Internal parameters for debug or other purposes that are not covered by hidden fields

logical operators in verifications are currently supported through xpath, script step and groovy step. Can you provide a scenario where this isn't sufficient or too awkward to use?

The ScriptStep is very flexible, but for simple things too complicated (espacially the handling with the property scope).

An Example:

You have a couple of lists with items. Now you want to verify that the sum of all items is equal to the total sum of items. A WebTest snippet (how it could look like):

<storexpath stepid="num items 1" xpath="//table[1]//td[1]" property="num1"/> <storexpath stepid="num items 2" xpath="//table[2]//td[1]" property="num2"/> <storexpath stepid="total items" xpath="//table[3]//td[1]" property="tot"/> <verifyProperty stepid="Compare Total" name="tot" text="#{num1+num2}"/>

It's much more readable that the ScriptStep. And: EL is very simple to integrate.

Oliver