En Fr
Web/database development and more...
« Security tips for web developersHungarian notation on steroids: semantic types & suffixes »

Testing web applications

17.05.05

English (EU) Testing web applications

Permalink 23:20:20, by Francois PLANQUE Email , Categories: Web Dev
Client Side Testing

Note to myself: unit testing is a great thing and I should do it more, I plan to do it more. But, unit testing is not enough...

What we need for web applications (or complex dynamic web sites if you prefer) would be something like this: the TEST program would act like a regular web browser, executing javascript and all the rest. The main difference with a web browser would be that the TEST program would be scriptable.

You could script it to log in, enter data into forms, perform search requests, check that the requested data appears on the screen, etc... You may even want to compare the generated HTML with a prerecorded excerpt. You may want to tolerate differences like white spaces and may be even non structural tags (ignore spans, styles attributes, etc...)

Of course, you'll want the TEST program to validate the XHTML output as well as the CSS styles.

Advanced testing would involve sending onclic events to specific objects on the page and see how the javascript behaves.

You'd have different scenarios you could run in sequence to fully test your application.

Even better: you could run multiple scenarios concurently (you'll need cookie isolated client threads for this) in order to stress load your application and record response times.

God, I gotta stop dreaming about it and find that gem...

Later:

I found a few potentially interesting tools here:

  1. Puffin Automation Framework. Open Source. (also see this paper)
  2. QEngine WebTest. Free / Commercial.
  3. WAPT Web Application Testing. $ 250.
  4. WebKing. Commercial.
  5. OpenLoad. Commercial.
  6. Web Performance Trainer. 499 € +.
  7. iOpus Internet Macros. $30 - $499.
  8. eValid

Mucho later:

1 comment

Comment from: Lois [Visitor] · http://www.abelgraphics.co.uk
But overall, don't these tools (real and potential) invite extra complexity simply because they can cope with it, as it were...? The analogy might be coding HTML with Dreamweaver, as opposed to doing it by hand - and Dreamweaver is so 20thC.
2005-05-21 @ 12:37

Comments are closed for this post.