I
think it is very usefull tool. I have in fact already used it. I think it should
have its own maling list.
By the
way I consider indicating what form for every form actions a good
practice.
Cheer
Pierre
-----Original Message-----Hi,
From: Marcus Tettmar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Wtr-general] Watir WebRecorder 0.5 Update
I've been keeping a close eye on this list but apart from the forms issue, which I raised myself, and one posting that brought the spaces thing to my attention, I wasn't aware of any extra support issues directly related to webrecorder or anything to the effect of "the recorder works, but watir doesn't" as you have suggested. Had I seen anything like that I would have jumped right in, I can assure you.
In regards to the forms issue - I raised that myself in reference to WebRecorder, yes, but didn't necessarily expect you to have to change anything in Watir. An alternative approach would have been that I could have changed WebRecorder to not insert the form() reference if it found only one form on the page. I just needed to know how it was meant to work.
I did not provide this version of WebRecorder in order to create any extra burden for you, and I am sorry if you feel that is all it has achieved. I'm not aware that it has in fact directly contributed to any extra support requests, but I suppose as a product grows in popularity, as Watir clearly is doing, and whether or not WebRecorder is in some way responsible for that, the support burden will increase as more and more people get to know about it, many of whom will be less technical than the earlier adopters. That's almost a fact of life - a side effect of success.
I have made it quite clear when running WebRecorder and on the WebRecorder web page that knowledge of Watir and Ruby is essential and that any problems with recording are not indicative of any problem in Watir. But if you think WebRecorder is causing you undue burden then clearly we must do something about it.
One thing that I think would benefit this mailing list, for a number of reasons, would be a weekly FAQ posting. By posting this regularly it will keep people aware of it and new subscribers would always see it. This could explain how best to post questions, how (not) to report bugs, where to find answers, how to download the latest version .. etc. This should help keep the quality of postings high and remove some repetition. This could also address WebRecorder in some way - something to the effect of - if you get a problem with a WebRecorder script don't post to the general Watir group until you've understood what it is doing and/or emailed Marcus, or, if we had a WebRecorder list it, you've posted there first.
Ultimately, if WebRecorder is causing too big a nuisance for everyone then I could simply withdraw it altogether. I would be interested to hear what people feel about that. Is it useful? Is it bringing new users to Watir? If so, is that a good thing or a bad thing? Or is webrecorder just a complete waste of time? Happy to consider its future based on the feedback. I'm open to ideas.
Marcus
On 3/23/06, Pierre Garigue < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:should we start a mailing list for Webrecorder?
Cheers
Pierre
-----Original Message-----
From: Bret Pettichord [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 2:26 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Wtr-general] Watir WebRecorder 0.5 Update
Marcus,
Thanks for fixing this problem. I did not realize this was a
webrecorder bug. These problems have repeatedly been reported to this
mailing list, and people have most frequently been blaming the email
systems for adding the extra spaces.
We are getting many requests for support for the webrecorder. Like
these, they often come as "the recorder works, but watir doesn't". Of
course they really have no way of knowing where the problem is. How do
you suggest we handle supporting these users? In many cases they have
less technical background or understanding than had Watir users
heretofor.
Also, many of the webrecorder users have run into a problem when they
have a page with only one form. The webrecorder always includes the
"form()" method, but we had designed this specifically for the case
where there was more than one form. We've recently learned that in the
case with only one form, the Watir form method actually fails. This
bug is fixed in development, but is open in 1.4.1.
How do you propose to get this information to your users? Your welcome
to use a page (or more) on our wiki, if that seems helpful.
Frankly, we need to find a better method for supporting the recorder
users. I've been considering refusing to support them on this list
because of the burden.
Bret
On 3/23/06, Marcus Tettmar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've fixed the issue with WebRecorder recording leading and trailing spaces
> on the innertext of some links. I hadn't realised Watir strips leading and
> trailing spaces and therefore if a link had leading or trailing spaces the
> two failed to match up. WebRecorder now also trims innertext so the two now
> match.
>
> http://www.mjtnet.com/watir_webrecorder.htm
>
> --
> Marcus Tettmar
> http://www.mjtnet.com/
> Macro Scheduler & WebRecorder for Windows & Web Automation and Testing.
> WebRecorder for Ruby/Watir now available.
> _______________________________________________
> Wtr-general mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
_______________________________________________
Wtr-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
_______________________________________________
Wtr-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
--
Marcus Tettmar
http://www.mjtnet.com/
Macro Scheduler & WebRecorder for Windows & Web Automation and Testing. WebRecorder for Ruby/Watir now available.
_______________________________________________ Wtr-general mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
