I was mainly thinking about non-programmers; for testers without
programming experience, using an XML testing "language" to build tests
could result in more success up front (which I think is important in
sustaining interest in automated testing, and keeping people from
abandoning automation suites/frameworks/etc). Along the same
psychological lines, learning by modifying existing cases written in
XML could feel less intimidating than learning by reviewing raw Ruby
scripts.
Watir's design primarily resulted from teaching a test automation tutorial to testers over the past several years. By now, i've personally taught over a 100 people. In general, the Watir API has been modified until it made sense to these people. Althougth i did not try an XML-based syntax, i suspect that few testers would find it easier to use. In my view XML is a good language to tie together tools and protocols, but not so good for people.
One big advantage of "raw ruby" is that it can be typed in IRB and testers can immediately see what each line of code does as it executes. This has always been how i've taught Watir to people.
Years and years ago i taught young children to learn how to program using Logo with its interpreter, which is very much like Ruby/IRB. I strongly believe that this is the best way for most people to learn programming.
Bret
_______________________________________________ Wtr-general mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
