Hi Mark,
Here is the result with the suggested xpath you provided
*R_1737 returns*
<storeXPath
property="whatDoIContain"
xpath="//span[contains(text(), 'Subscriber')]/@class"
/>
No match for xpath expression <//span[contains(text(),
'Subscriber')]/@class>
*R_1714 returns*
<storeXPath
property="whatDoIContain"
xpath="//span[contains(text(), 'Subscriber')]/@class"
/>
No match for xpath expression <//span[contains(text(),
'Subscriber')]/@class>
So neither release version appear able to resolve the xpath
"//span[contains(text(), 'Subscriber')]/@class", is this what you were
expecting...?
Kind Regards,
Colin.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 09:16:45 +0100
> From: Marc Guillemot <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Webtest] Re: R_1714 to R_1737 differences...?
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> Reply-To: Marc Guillemot <[email protected]>
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> this is strange.
>
> What do you get for results for instance with:
> //span[contains(text(), 'Subscriber')]/@class
>
> Cheers,
> Marc.
> --
> Web: http://www.efficient-webtesting.com
> Blog: http://mguillem.wordpress.com
>
> Colin O'Brien wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > The node isn't matched at all it would appear. I've tried to use
> > storeXPath to see what is actually being matched for the node I'm
> > searching but the error returned reports that there is no match at all
> > for that node...
> >
> > Below is the actual span element as it appears in the source:
> >
> > <SPAN class=pagetitle>Items for a Subscriber</SPAN>
> >
> > Is the fact that "pagetitle" is unquoted likely to cause a problem if
> > strict html rules are being applied with the new version of htmlUnit...?
> >
> > From WebTest Results:
> >
> > storeXPath with R_1714
> > property: whatDoIContain
> > xpath: //sp...@class='pagetitle']/text()
> > => value: Items for a Subscriber
> >
> > storeXPath with R_1737
> > property: whatDoIContain
> > xpath: //sp...@class='pagetitle']/text()
> > error: No match for xpath expression
> <//sp...@class='pagetitle']/text()>
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Colin.
