Background: In cases(mainly in End to End UI tests), where a number of test paths(selection of alternative test steps) can be huge due to combinations however expected results are same and few. In those scenarios, I strongly feel the need to introduce an element of randomness to pick a test path as we are finding more and more issues manually while following a particular random path whereas the standard automated E2E test mostly passes following the primary flow.  Context:  In the end-to-end scenario consisting steps let's say [A-Z] where any of the steps may have alternative sub steps[a- g] can be run either on web/mobile app so if we vary any of the sub-steps in user journey, we are finding issues on some specific sub-steps selection but not in general.Also we cannot afford to run each unique combination of selection due to huge combinations either manually or by automation.  Problem statement: What is the standard/accepted common wisdom to design the randomness in alternative sub steps selection in end to end UI tests?  Edit: Adding more meaningful example  Example: An long user journey, consisting of multiple steps where each step independently can be done on either web or mobile app. And cases were found where doing some step in mobile doesn't reflect back in web app or vice versa.
123538
Several months ago I started an experiment in test automation. Each test, before it starts, picks up random test data. For instance, when my test requires a user with administration privileges, I draw a random account and then I from a group of admin users for this account I draw a random admin user.  The reason for using random test data was two-fold:    First, when we were using static, i.e., hard-coded test data, sometimes tests started to fail, because test data no longer existed in DB, e.g., a user has been removed from the database (we're having production dump in our test DB, so I guess the user has been deleted in production). When we started to find such users at runtime, the problem disappeared.  Second problem was that it was not really clear why certain test data were used for a certain test. We have inherited tests from the other team and couldn't understand their intentions behind, for instance, using user "xyz@awesome.com". By writing queries to find data, we started to explicitly state what type of test data we want, e.g., that we want a user with administration privileges.   While my approach solved both problems, it introduced also some new issues:   Tests occasionally fail, because they pick up wrong test data. This is because queries are sometimes incorrect. For instance, once a test drawn a random account that had no administrators at all. Good thing about that is that this way I keep learning new things about the system under tests, e.g., that there must be business reasons to have accounts without administrators. Test setup becomes more and more complex, as queries start to grow and thus tests seems now a bit more complex to understand.   I was also hoping to increase coverage and find more bugs by using random test data just like it is done in fuzz testing. Instead, I mostly found bugs in my test and learned how little I know about the system under test. Finally, ROI doesn't seem big. Before the change there was a cost of maintaining static test data (updating test data if they were outdates). Now I have to maintain complex queries when the test takes "wrong" test data and this tends to occur more often than outdating of static test data previously.  I wonder whether using random test data really makes sense and how to do it right?
37315
I'm thinking of live production sites here, where there is a continuous community or much content being updated, sort of like a newspaper site or community site (the one I work at is a healthcare improvement company) and we have news articles, programs and so on.  While the underlying code is tested and released there are often production issues that come up, maybe certain pages stop working, style sheets suddenly don't appear like they did due to a service patch or some tweak done to improve production security or performance.  There is Acceptance Testing for when a deployment goes out to make sure things work right, Regression Testing to make sure nothing has been broken since previous releases.  Considering we've done these types of tests and things are working fine what would you call testing, or checking, the site to make sure things still work fine?  To be sure new pages are being crawled for search indexing?  To check that newly added pages are using plug-ins correctly?  Or so on.  My manager and I were discussing some issues that have cropped up and decided we needed to do something like this, but then to sort of note it in our status reports we didn't really have a name for it.  Anyone done this and have a term that might be good?  Or would you consider it covered by something like Continuous Acceptance Testing or some such term?
43987
This morning i was looking online for articles that could lead me to a method that can be used to measure/quantify usability &amp; user experience. The method i was interested in finding more information about, is about whether it is possible to have a set of good practices that can help in grading an overall system, both in it's prototype stage and even when creating mockups.   Obviously heuristic evaluation and user testing are key elements in developing a good user experience, but i was wondering if before these stages begin and testing is conducted there might possibly be a method for grading your mockups/prototypes internally before going forward to stakeholders and begin testing?   All answers and feedback are welcome as of yet i have been unable to find something that is similar to what i'm describing, i've read up about:  SUM (Single Usability Metric) -   System Usability Scale -
68190
I am a manual functional tester and I am keen on shifting my career from Manual testing to Automation testing using Selenium. What is the best way to begin with this goal of mine? Thanks!
42290
I am looking for an open-source functional testing automation tool that supports testing of Silverlight based applications.  To be more specific, the tool should be able to recognize objects within the Silverlight applications.  I have found a question that talks about , but I would like to ask for help in dealing with similar testing automation experience on Microsoft Silverlight.
35968
I am working on an ERD which represents the relationships between entities in a Web development company behavioral model. There I have entities like:   Customer Service ----------- (like: web development, web design, web consultation, ...) Order-item ------- (like: web development, web design, web consultation, ...) Order Invoice Project Project-phase Task --------------- (like: web development task3, web design task7) Developer Delivery ----------- (like: the developed web app, web consultation session, ...)   I have this diagram so far, though I know it still has major problems, and it is just for a start point:    Main concept   Customer makes order-items on services, combined to form an order which relates to an invoice. Each project has multiple project-phases with each project-phase related to an order. Each project-phase has multiple tasks, each of which is assigned to a developer. Each project-phase has a delivery, which will be delivered upon payment of the related orders invoice.   Questions   Are has and contains completely the same? If not, how to choose between them for relationships?! what is the measure?! Are there any rational problems with the Main concept section? Any helpful ideas or suggestions to improve this model?   Any help with this, would be really appreciated.  Update 1  Refined version of the diagram     Update 2  Considering an analogy of a Fast food restaurant would be helpful:   Customer ---------- A hungry person Service ------------- Making a burger, Home delivery, Mobile delivery, ... Order-item --------- A burger, ... Order ---------------- A home-delivered burger Invoice -------------- The printed invoice Project -------------- Serving the customer for a complete year (like a contract) Project-phase ----- Serving the customer for a single day Task ----------------- Preparing the kitchen, process the meat, ... Developer ---------- The cookie Delivery ------------- A burger in wrapped in wax papaer and a drink with the tray   Update 3  ()     Project seems to be unrelated to Customer in your diagram. Is this what you intended?   I think Order is and Project should not be related, as I think it is something off-the-counter and customer has nothing to do with it. she/he is only after the delivery and is concerned about time and money, nothing else. Please tell if I am wrong.     Are all Orders part of a Project or can you have orders that aren't in a project at all?   All Orders are part of a project, except those new ones which are waiting in the process queue.     Similarly, you relate order item directly to customer, but also to order. Are orders split between customers?   Please think of Order-Item as these:   web design web design consultancy domain name consultancy ...   So, customer choose some of these items, collected as an Order which has an invoice and could be paid. Order-Items are directly related to offered Services. I don't understand what do you mean by Are orders split between customers?.     If not you don't need a ternary relationship between customer, order item and service. Rather, an order item is an intersection between order and service. Order items belong to customers by inheritance from order (or even project?)   This is somehow true: Order items belong to customers by inheritance from order, but I think it is more rational to say it like this:     Order-Items, inherited from Service, belong to Order which itself belongs to Customer.
108586
On electronics.stackexchange we had  about constructing a True Random Number Generator. Since the method relies on noise, which isn't deterministic, the only way to test the quality of the RNG seems to be empirical. Not being a statistician I suggested to test a long bit sequence for normality, but I have no idea what outcome is acceptable and what isn't. For instance counting single bits I guess we have a thumbs-up for a 499500/500500 distribution, but when is the ratio too much skewed to be acceptable? Same for 2-bit and longer sequences. Of course, if testing for normality is a Bad Idea™, I'd like to hear it, including better alternatives.    edit Diehard was mentioned a few times, but I'm not sure this answers my question. The normality test should give a normal distribution, with better bell curve approximations for longer sequences. Diehard seems also to have tests which either should result in normal or exponential distributions. But my question remains: how do I judge the results? Just by looking at the curve and discern a bell curve in it? To get back at my first example, a 499500/500500 distribution is definitely OK, and a 950000/50000 distribution definitely is a no-no, so where does the switch-over happen?
119319
We're planning on integrating some kind of progress bar in a multi-step process.   Our developers figured it would make sense that on step 4 of 9, 3/9ths of the  bar would be filled in to show how many steps were actually completed:    However, a few regular people I showed the examples to were initially confused and thought since you're on step 4, 4/9ths should be filled in.   So I was thinking of doing something like this as a compromise but I don't really like it:    My question: Are there any related best practices/research on whether to show in the progress bar how much has been completed vs what step they are currently on?
95382
I have made a web platform for the cab booking service. And I want to ensure the user interface and functionality of my web application is working across different browsers.   But there are many browsers available in the market, can you people suggest me to choose the browsers for testing?
13760
So I've been testing web based analytical software now for the past 4 years or so with mostly manual techniques. But for 2015, I've set myself the goal of getting setup and start writing automated tests and to introduce automated testing into my company.  I've done a little research and it seems that Selenium is quite big when it comes to writing automated tests, but most of the tutorials I've come across reference the Java language.  Some questions:   Is Java the primary language used for Selenium tests?  Do you recommend it over C# ?  Wat is the process of writing test scripts?  Are there Frameworks that I should use that can make the process even easier?
43307
I need to design a form that may consist of 3 or 4 steps, all of them requesting both mandatory and optional data. The overall form contains a lot of data inputs, so I thought it would be better to split the form into pages or steps, to avoid having a too long vertical scrolling.  I can't find any practical example of such a long form in an existing iOS app, since most of them just request few data to create an account, but my app requires collecting more user input.   Would it be a good approach to build a view for each form step, and push them all in a navigation controller?   The idea is to have the back button in the navigation bar to allow going to the previous step, and a "next" button to go forward, I don't know if placing it in the navigation bar as well, or at the bottom edge of the current view. Or maybe could I use a stepper with arrows similar to the Mail app? I couldn't find anything about it in iOS Human Interface Guidelines, only a stepper with +/- buttons. Or a segmented control, with a segment per step?  However, in iOS Human Interface Guidelines, in navigation bar section I've read that it is intended for "navigation through an information hierarchy" (). I don't know how strict is Apple when applying the guidelines in the document when submitting to the App Store, and if using this approach for peer views, as in this case, would be rejected. Another option I thought, it was using instead a page control and a scroll view... but here comes into play input validation. I suppose that for a long multistep form it should be better to validate each step's inputs before allowing continue, shouldn't it? I find easier to handle this in the first approach (navigation controller and bar), simply enabling the "next" button when the inputs correctly fulfilled, than in the page control approach (where I actually don't know if it is possible to momentarily disable forward page scrolling).
90231
I have noticed that many online forms and surveys these days are starting to use a mixture of radio and checkbox buttons for the same question, that is, for a question that gives the person a number of choices, you can either make a selection from radio buttons or checkbox buttons.         &ndash; Wireframes created with   Although it looks a little bit confusing to start with, it is not too difficult for the user to realize that the buttons behave as they should (option A or a combination of option 1-3). However, to me this feels like designs are starting to rely on the interaction to indicate the behaviour to the user rather than going back to good structure and logic used in the question.   Is the argument that because Design A saves the user one extra click that it is a 'more efficient' design? I think the amount of time saved on the extra click is not as much as the time spent on understanding what the options are, so Design B still seems to be a more efficient design overall. It also makes changes easier to implement because the logic is clearer. I hope this is not actually a trend I am noticing here, or if it is then I am looking for the rationale behind it.
77947
while googling and reading documentation and API, I've seen multiple solutions for "combining" 2 forms into one, and thus creating a multistep form.  What I want though, not even sure if it's doable, is to "split" my (huge) user registration form into 2 steps, where the value of one field (the only one in step 1) would determine which fields should show up in step 2.  I wouldn't like to drop the entire registration form and re-create it in code or in another way and somehow re-implement the whole user registration process. Is that possible?  EDIT: to avoid misunderstandings, what I need to do is an "actual" multistep form, with submitions between steps, and not some front-end handling. That is, I want the whole thing to be javascript independant.  EDIT2: to clarify even further, the task is figure out how/if possible to pretty much split any "edit" form to 2 parts. The current question does ask about the user/edit and/or user/register form specifically, but in order to come up with a more generalized solution, one might also want to split a node/edit form in to 2 parts. That's what I am really asking about. Splitting an entity/edit form in to 2 (or more) steps.
71577
I want to know if there's a way I can set it so that on first join, a player gets teleported to a random location on the map automatically. Then if the player dies without having a home set, they are once again teleported to a random location but not if they have their home set.   What would be the best way to accomplish this? May it be through command blocks or plugins.   Thank you for your time.
54154
First, let me say that I'm no electrical engineer, I'm just a curious student.   Here's a photo of a Raspberry Pi A+.    I (as one completely ignorant of PCB design) would expect the electrical paths to be as simple as possible, which normally implies using the shortest path from the source to destination. Here, the printer can clearly print straight diagonal paths, but some other nearby paths are stair-stepped, or even take bizarre roundabout paths to their destinations.  I've seen this on a variety of PCBs, including other models of the Raspberry Pi, some Arduinos, computer motherboards...  Can you explain, in layman's terms, why these more complex paths are chosen?
38886
My boss has insisted for a while that our login process be divided into two steps on separate pages: on the first page, ask the user's e-mail address. On the second page, either display "user found" and ask for password, or "user not found" and ask for e-mail again.  He insists it is much easier for our users who often forget their credentials or if they even have an account yet. I've long been against this approach because it forces every user to go through two steps every time they login. (I also wonder if it's a security concern, knowing that it will confirm when an email exists in our system.) I would prefer to have a more standard login page with e-mail (all of our usernames are e-mails) and password, and one very clear link for "forgot password?".  Neither of us have any hard data to support our theories, and we have more important things to do than A/B test something that he doesn't think is even a problem. I was just wondering if anyone here could provide some arguments or hard data for or against either approach. I enjoy considering UX design, but I am not an expert.
26680
As most of the time we have to think of requirement to accomplished using out-of-Box feature like e.g process builder which we think of an alternative to trigger, but suppose I have to handle scenario of Delete using Process Builder then there is limitation!(e.g calculation of roll-up on Delete) so I am curious about what is that limitation because of which Delete scenario is not handled in Process Builder.