Page History

...

1. We convened a committee with representation from the Help Desk (Lisa Robinson), the Quality Assurance Team (Sean Velury and Don Flanders), Web Services , DCAD and Student Systems, (Michael Berger and Ed Orsini), Stellar (Judith McJohn) Student Systems (Felicia Young), and SWRT (Alex Kozlov) and began studying the current web application testing landscape.
2. We looked at a list of approximately 82 different automated Test Tools (http://www.softwareqatest.com/qatweb1.html#FUNC) and choose 6 worthy of further evaluation, based on the following criteria:
   1. Support for all MIT operating systems
   2. Support for all MIT browsers
   3. Ability to playback tests in a browser (instead of testing via browser emulation)
   4. Ability to record tests (to make test creation easier)
   5. Some sort of gui (versus a code only framework)
   6. Decent documentation
   7. Some sort of name in the industry
3. We created a test plan to evaluate these Test Tools (view the test plan is here). We created the test plan based on an existing administrative web application called APR Hires. The test plan was heavily weighted with DOM manipulation, AJAX and other JavaScript functionality. (expand)involved data input of text, numbers, dates and dollar amounts. It included testing AJAX calls, JavaScript Validation of user input, insertion of new DOM elements. The test plan contains positive test assertions (checks in the software to confirm that the expected result occurred) for most user input. The test plan did not contain negative assertions (tests that unexpected things did not happen).
4. We broke up into groups of 1 to 3 users to try each of the 6 Test Tools.
5. We modified the Test Plan as needed.
6. We found the following:

...