The visual editor looking the same as the view is just one idea, and in some ways we know the editor will look a little different, so it's probably not that good of a use case for this kind of testing.
I was more thinking about interactions, such as you click on a link, some options popup below it, you select one, you get a dialog, etc. This kind of testing is best for testing interactions, and it would really shine in this, and other similar cases. - Trevor On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Markus Glaser <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've been aware of this tool for quite a while, and shown it to some > other devs around > > here. I think it's awesome, but I have not had a need for it yet. I think > the visual editor > > may present some cases where this makes sense > Just being curious, can you elaborate on that? From my experience (I tried > TinyMCE on MediaWiki ;), would it not be easier to compare the code a visual > editor produces with the result of the preview mode? I assume it could > easier be done by comparing the DOM branches, using QUnit or Selenium > instead of images. > > > - but generally it seems the most useful for writing tests that involved > taking several input > > actions and expecting a consistent result. > I agree. I thought more about testing skin layout, e.g. divs not being > rendered in the right place in some browsers. For complex interactions, I'd > still prefer Selenium or other "non-optical" tools. > > -- Markus (mglaser) > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Markus Glaser <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > while I don't like the idea of introducing more and more testing > > tools, I can still see an interesting use case here: as of now, we > > have no way to test whether a given layout (HTML, JS, CSS) is really > > rendered the way we want it to be, since both Selenium and QUnit make > > their tests based on DOM, right? Sikuli on the other hand seems to be > > based on screenshots and here we could detect broken layout. There is > > also some kind of similarity algorithm (which I hope is configurable) > > so that one test could be used in different browsers even if the > rendering is not identical to the pixel. > > > > The question is, do we have the need for testing screen layout? > > > > Cheers, > > > > Markus > > > > P.S.: CCing wikitech, since this might be of broader interest. > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Sumana Harihareswara [mailto:[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. August 2011 14:02 > > An: Markus Glaser; Chad Horohoe; Timo Tijhof > > Betreff: automated testing with Sikuli? > > > > http://sikuli.org/ > > > > Have any of you run across Sikuli before? Just wanted to point it out > > to you. It might face the same problems as Selenium, though. > > > > -- > > Sumana Harihareswara > > Volunteer Development Coordinator > > Wikimedia Foundation > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
