Comments on: Here it is. My first post. (a.k.a. Why automate sub-UI?)

By: Pranjal Nigam

Pranjal Nigam — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:42:03 +0000

Superb.

Good to know there are people who are still trying to make a point, when it comes to TDD, and sub-UI testing.

Impressive thinking Marisa.

By: Marisa Seal

Marisa Seal — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:14:18 +0000

Thanks Dawn – for the compliments and “push” to expand upon this post. I’ve got some writin’ to do!

Marisa

By: Dawn

Dawn — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:45:38 +0000

Marisa-

This is a great post, and I will be using it to refer to many people I know. There are still LOTS of people out there who don’t know that there even exists a world of testing between the unit testing level and the UI level!

I am finding that I am still having to convince people that investment in something like FitNesse is worthwhile (and thus, I have had WAY less experience in it than I wish!)

Now that you’ve made your point here, I’d love some beginner tutorials on making FitNesse work … I see some other posts, but would like to see one that is just one step beyond this post. Answer this question:

“Okay, you have convinced me that I should automate tests below the UI. Where do I start?”

Possibly FitNesse in a .NET environment? That’s just *my* vote …

By: Daniel Brown

Daniel Brown — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 02:44:01 +0000

Great post Marisa. I think that it’s a great debate that’s far from answered, but I think the proof of the test validity is in the results. If you find tons of bugs testing automated Sub-UI, then I think few would be hard pressed to challenge your methods. By their nature, test heuristics are imperfect no matter which one you use. Even if you have to water board a couple developers in the process, it’s okay. The results are all that matters.

By: Adam Senn

Adam Senn — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:34:12 +0000

Great post. Functional testing below the UI also forces developers to keep their logic out of the UI. Separation of concerns, baby!

By: Gojko Adzic

Gojko Adzic — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 20:13:15 +0000

Spot on. Also, UI is constrained by session and workflow rules and sometimes it is much easier to specify and verify business rules unaffected by session and workflow directly. There is a big difference between “what” should be tested and “how” it gets tested. UI makes us focus on “how”, and in a majority of cases “what” is more direct, easier to explain and understand and more important.

By: Shannon "The Sensai" Turner

Shannon "The Sensai" Turner — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:02:54 +0000

Bravo, Magnifico!!! Marisa you rock. I agree with you on the testing at a sub-ui level. Testing functionality of an application outside the framework of the ui is the only testing method that can find issues between ui and the core functionality. The only time where testing at the sub-ui level would not be possible would be if you have purchased a third-party plug-in that is a black box. However, even the third-party plug-in can be tested directly and the functionality of that third-party plug-in through the ui.
I love the example about a last name being stored in the middle name column.

By: Renay

Renay — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:50:30 +0000

I have no clue what that all means, but it sounds impressive!

By: Bill Milam

Bill Milam — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:38:42 +0000

Excellent thinking! The UI should not be performing business logic – going sub-UI is the “second” best way to provide confidence that business rules and requirements are being met.
In my opionion – the “first” best way to confirm business logic is to have a full and complete battery of UNIT test written by the developer in collaboration with the tester. But most UNIT test tend to be mainly testing “happy path” logic flows since the developers tend to think that full spectrum sub-UI testing is the tester’s job. Rarely in my experience haf UNIT test fully and properly excercised the code so as to provide tester’s acceptance. True XP/TDD shops are probably the exception to the above generalization.
Keep “diving under the hood” for the sub-UI testing – it is absolutely necessary for acceptance testing.
Great Blog Marisa!!!!!!