Okay, i agree with most of this, but i still think that using IE#text.include? is not bad practice, when i want to check that there's no global errors (or anything else global). So, for example - browser.text.should_not include?(Exception).
Jarmo On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Bret Pettichord <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, I agree completely on both points. > > Bret > > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Alan Baird <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thanks for the reply Bret. I also want to add my .02 that "visible" >> is a bit difficult to nail down. I find the .visible? method to be >> pretty good, but not always 100% dependable. For example, in one of >> the apps I test, an element is made not visible by using the zindex >> value of -999 to place certain elements behind others, thus making >> them not visible to the users, but "visible" in terms of the .visible? >> method. This is a legitimate way of doing things in HTML, but it >> would be very difficult to write .visible? to handle this case. >> >> As for IE#text, it seems like using this to detect things on a page is >> a recipe for bad things to happen. I can't see myself being in favor >> of it. >> >> Alan >> _______________________________________________ >> Wtr-development mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development > > > > -- > Bret Pettichord > Lead Developer, Watir, www.watir.com > > Blog, www.io.com/~wazmo/blog > Twitter, www.twitter.com/bpettichord > > > _______________________________________________ > Wtr-development mailing list > [email protected] > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development > _______________________________________________ Wtr-development mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development
