Advantages of mult. browser functional automation?
Is there a white paper that states the vulnerabilities of a web-based application if multiple-browser automation (Functional automation) is not done?
From my knowledge, the main benefit of multiple-browser QA is that browsers render objects differently, alignment, font color, font appearance etc.
One of the automation tools we use (Watir) has huge advantages, and I want to make sure moving away from Selenium is the right choice. Or if we do move away from Selenium, that we are covering the cracks caused by doing so.
Re: Advantages of mult. browser functional automation?
There are far more deeper implications depending on exactly what your product does.
But the basic notion is browsers are application that complies to compilation of a multiple specifications such as http, html, jax, jsp. Because it is a consumer product, browsers are very forgiving. As such, validating at the browser level does not assure that the product is truely compliant. Meaning even if there are problems, browser may happen to luck out and fix it. But sometimes they won't.
Problems like this can happen but most engineerings (QA or Dev) are unable to identify problems. The better approach that I have seen over the years is to validate using a browser emulators with strict specification validation engines to make sure that your application is conforming to the specification, then validate with browser to ensure that quirks of the browsers are observed. 12 years ago when IE and Netscape was early in infancy and RFCs were loosely observed, multiple browser testing had substantially more benefits. But browser codes have matured and in general, the value of the browser level validation has become minimum over time, provided that validation with strict compliance against the specs are followed.