SPONSORS:






User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Test case documentation, approval (Pear review) ?

    Hello All,

    What is a level of test cases verification in the Test Director before to automate them? My team standards are even to check using comma in test cases.
    Example from a test case:

    Under “User status” label, key in variable in the “Telephone” edit box.

    If you miss comma after label or quotas you will never get approval to start with automation.
    I feel we spend colossal amount time to do this level of perfectionism for internal documentation and have no time to test the application.

    Interested in how other QA teams document and review test cases.

    Thank you,

    Tania

  2. #2
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Test case documentation, approval (Pear review) ?

    Hi Tania,

    I think that it is obvious that your company is taking review formality to the extreme, do you have an idea why? Sometimes this is a reflex to a previous issue or an external requirement (from customers maybe...?)

    In any case, I am used to reviews going over English and making sure that the language can be understood by all and that parameters are correctly defined. But mostly we review the contents of our tests; meaning how well are they written, are they providing effective and efficient coverage, and whether there are alternative scenarios that could perform the same operation faster and easier.

    Reviews are performed in 2 phases:
    First Phase is a simple peer review when the tester sits with a colleage and they walkthrough the scenarios.
    Second Phase is to perform the same walkthrough on a larger forum where people from dev and sometimes even product provide their inputs.

    In any case, you need to understand why are your reviews so strict and try to provide a solution to the requirement that is better for all parts.

    Good Luck!
    -joel
    9 times out 10, less is actually more

    PractiTest - QA and Test Management Tool
    QABlog - QA Intelligence Blog

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    United Kngdom
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Test case documentation, approval (Pear review) ?

    Hi,

    Another method is to actually have the automated script run successfully in a stable environment. The message log can then be verified to see if the test has performed successfully or not. This does mean however that you need to code MSG (message) verfication points in the code to actually write to the log i.e. state what value was expected and what was actual.

    If the automated test runs successfully then the script can be considered ready. QA checks on the actual syntax of the code to ensure it meets your companies standards can be carried out as a process improvement phase or a foundation phase. Getting automated scripts 'to market' should essentially be your primary objective as this is where you will be measured and the agreement by management that budgets are appropriate and justified for the test effort.

    I have attached a basic 'ownership' flow that may help in what status a test case has between the mnanual test team and the automated test team. The term ART refers to the Automated Regression Test team.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    United Kngdom
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Test case documentation, approval (Pear review) ?

    Attachment as stated
    Attached Images Attached Images

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Test case documentation, approval (Pear review) ?

    It sounds like you are using this very formal syntax for manual steps in some way to auto-generate your automation cases. If so, I understand the reason for the formality.

    We also have a peer review, and handle it through a manual workflow that although simple works very effectively.
    To the test Status field (status as viewed through test plan area) we added additional field values - "Ready for Review", "In Review", "Repair", "In Design".
    When someone completes a test case it is marked "In Review", obviously the other states are used during the review process.
    This makes it very easy for someone who wants a review to set a filter and see only what needs worked on. Comments field is used to mark review notes, testers can see when their test status needs changed and they need to correct it. Also makes it easy to report on overall progress....

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.36 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 9.68%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.4 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.2.8 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBNominate (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Username Changing provided by Username Change (Free) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
BetaSoft Inc.
Digital Point modules: Sphinx-based search
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:09 AM.

Copyright BetaSoft Inc.