SPONSORS:






User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    Once you decide to use Dom because it's object recognition is superior, have you basically thrown in the towel as far as the cross-browser testing architecture efficiencies that Seque boasts of ?

    (i.e. record against one browser, leverage your investment by playing back against many)

    Also, can anyone share how much additional effort it has taken them to take a suite of tests developed against one browser and make them work against another browser (or more appropriately "the" other browser ?)


  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    152
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    Hi,

    At this point there is only DOM support for IE5. I have heard a rumour that there will be Netscape DOM support in SilkTest 5.5, which is due for release sometime towards the end of this quarter (apparently!).

    John.

    ------------------

    John O'Neill.
    Quality Automation Ltd.
    www.quality-automation.com
    John O'Neill.
    Quality Automation Ltd.
    www.quality-automation.com

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    192
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    Netscape versions prior to 6.0 do not follow W3C DOM, thus SilkTest can not tap into this technology to recognize the objects. My suggestion would be to utilize the virtual object extension to capture the power of cross-browser testing.

    [This message has been edited by TestArch (edited 03-09-2001).]

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    For web application testing VO is not that bad. Actually fairly easy(so far).

    You have to take into consideration that a test case is always controlled and almost never dynamic. That means you know what will be changing and what is not. So VO is perfect for all web tests(I don't see why DOM is better than VO). Unless the Devs doesn't know how to put captions in their controls

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    belmont, ma, usa
    Posts
    3
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    Just to verify the rumor that someone mentioned earlier in the post.

    I am currently playing with the 5.5 beta and it definitely DOES support the DOM for Netscape 6. I am still trying to evaluate how closely it compares to the decs which are taken when using the IE5_DOM extension (in IE of course).

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    belmont, ma, usa
    Posts
    3
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    Just to verify the rumor that someone mentioned earlier in the post.

    I am currently playing with the 5.5 beta and it definitely DOES support the DOM for Netscape 6. I am still trying to evaluate how closely it compares to the decs which are taken when using the IE5_DOM extension (in IE of course).

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    When I was using WebLoad I read that IE and Netscape have different DOM specifications. Is that correct? If so DOM is useless for crossplatform testing. Unless you like to write novels:B

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Redwood City, CA
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does DOM kill the efficiencies of Silk\'s \'cross browser\' testing methodology

    Before Silk 5.0.3 I had frame definitions and methods that would allow me to write scripts that ran trasparently on NS 4.5, IE 4, and IE 5.0. Now with IE 5.5 I am having all sorts of problems with "invalid handle" when running under 5.0.2. If I try to run under 5.0.3 IE 5 DOM all the frame declarations no longer work. When I run under IE 5 VO, some work but many do not. Has anyone had any experience in trying to have a single set to frame declarations to test various browser versions?

    ------------------

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.0 Beta 4 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.9 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Questions / Answers Form provided by vBAnswers (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBNominatevBulletin 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 04:18 AM.

Copyright BetaSoft Inc.