[Wtr-general] ANN: Watir WebRecorder

Tue Feb 21 13:13:45 EST 2006

These changes look good.

On 2/16/06, Marcus Tettmar <marcus.tettmar at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As a follow up I have just uploaded version 0.4 of Watir WebRecorder which
> now has support for Divs and TDs which have onclick handlers.  It also
> displays a disclaimer on startup regarding its limitations and that any
> failure to record something is no reflection on the abilities of Watir.
> I've also added a disclaimer to the Watir WebRecorder page on our site and
> have had the Macro Scheduler WebRecorder page modified to say "No Advanced
> Programming Skills Required" rather than "No Programming Skills Required".
> I hope this goes some way towards satisfying any concerns.
>
> http://www.mjtnet.com/watir_webrecorder.htm
>
> Regards,
> Marcus
>
> On 2/16/06, Marcus Tettmar <marcus.tettmar at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Bret,
> >
> > On 2/16/06, Bret Pettichord < bret at pettichord.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. When i recorded a script i saw a lot of calls to IE#wait. I don't
> > > believe they are necessary in any of the cases i saw. In fact, my position
> > > is pretty much that users shouldn't have to make calls to IE#wait in their
> > > scripts. If they do, it is a bug in Watir. I'd suggest removing them and
> > > reporting any cases where they seem necessary to you as bugs.
> >
> >
> > In 0.3 under Tools/Options you can switch off "Insert Waits".  I have
> > found that they are sometimes useful so I have made it optional.  At present
> > you also need it to record/automate server auth logins.  Goto waits forever
> > if a login box pops up because the page hasn't finished loading until after
> > the password has been issued.  So there are options to use ie.navigateinstead of Goto and therefore an
> > ie.wait is needed after it.  But in the latest version 0.3 these things
> > are optional.  So you can switch this off.
> >
> > 2. Not really a bug, but i think the "require
> > > 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner'" is also unnecessary.
> >
> >
> > I'll check that out.
> >
> > The other thing that is missing is support for Area tags.  While
> > > WebRecorder can record clicks on Area maps I couldn't find any support to
> > > play them back in Watir.
> > >
> >
> > True. I haven't seen much demand for this, so i don't think any one is
> > > working on it.
> > >
> >
> > In the past I have had to automate web sites that used an Area for the
> > navigation menu.  So it was necessary to record it.  But it is true that
> > they don't seem to be that prevalent.
> >
> >
> > Regarding my views of recorders...
> > >
> > > I think that recorders can be useful aids to programmers. But i think
> > > you need to know how to write and modify the code that is being generated.
> > >
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> > One problem is that recorders often lead people into thinking that they
> > > don't have to be a programmer to use the tool.
> > >
> >
> > I'm not so sure.  I cannot be alone in using Microsoft Office's macro
> > recorder to get a jump start on creating VBA code.  If I can't remember how
> > to do something, or want to get the bare bones of the code from which to
> > work I will nearly always record the main process with the VBA recorder.
> > But then I will tidy up the code and make changes to it.  I am very
> > experienced in VBA yet I find the recorder extremely useful.  I am aware of
> > many other VBA programmers who do the same.  At the same time the complete
> > beginner can quickly build basic macros without knowing any code.  They
> > won't get as far as the programmer but both are happy and both find the tool
> > useful within the limitations of their abilities.   He knows that a
> > programmer would get more out of it.
> >
> > In fact, your website makes this very claim. This is what i object to.
> > > Not to recorders themselves.
> > >
> >
> > In respect of the Watir WebRecorder I wasn't aware that we were making
> > this claim at all.  In regards to Macro Scheduler's WebRecorder it is true
> > that we say no programming skills required.  But this version outputs very
> > different code and is for a very different type of user.  In terms of the
> > code it outputs the people that use it don't need to modify it.  I can cite
> > customers with no programming experience at all using MacroScript
> > WebRecorder to create dozens of useful web automation scripts without really
> > understanding the code it is creating.  So in their case I can stand by our
> > claims.
> >
> > A second concern is that it simply is much harder to make a reliable
> > > recorder than it to make a reliable execution tool. This is why Watir is an
> > > execution tool, only. The problem is that there are always all kinds of
> > > controls that a tool can execute against but can't record. For example, i
> > > tried to use WebRecorder against a random website that had some javascript
> > > links (probably div tags, i didn't even look) and they didn't get recorded.
> > > I didn't even report that as a bug, because i didn't expect it to work.
> > > Every test tool i've ever used that had a recorder had more reliability
> > > problems with the recorders than the execution. I see them as two separate
> > > things. But that isn't the view of the non-programming user. To even
> > > understand the limits of a recorder, you have to know something about html
> > > -- in other words you have to be, in some sense, a programmer. Anyway, my
> > > point is that if i were to bundle a recorder (any recorder) with Watir,
> > > people would try it first, learn that it wasn't reliable and then conclude
> > > that Watir wasn't reliable. In other words, it would reduce the percieved
> > > reliability of Watir.
> > >
> >
> > I haven't gotten around to creating a help file for the Watir version
> > yet, but will do so soon.  When I do I can write in some caveats.  The
> > MacroScript version explains that not everything can be recorded, but to
> > contact us if they find anything that can't so that we can see if we can
> > improve it.  Otherwise we never get to know about these sites and while we
> > spend time looking at random sites we can't find everything.
> >
> > As you say it is hard, perhaps impossible, to make a recorder for all
> > web sites that will manage to record everything.  There's simply a limit to
> > what the developer can think of to test and the number of web sites and the
> > ways they work is infinite.  So far our users appear to be aware of that and
> > let us know when they find something it fails with.  We are either able to
> > find a solution and make a modification for them (and the product gets
> > better) or we have to explain the reason why it can't be recorded.
> >
> > Re the issue you found - possibly Div tags - Watir WebRecorder doesn't
> > record Div tags.  MacroScript WebRecorder doesn't by default but has an
> > option where you can specify extra tags you'd like it to record.  So it
> > probably gets round this problem.  In time we could add the same sort of
> > functionality to Watir WebRecorder if people are interested.
> >
> > If the recorder is a separate tool, that doesn't make any claims about
> > > allowing non-programmers to create Watir scripts, then i'm cool with it.
> > >
> >
> > How about I add a big warning box that appears on startup with a big
> > disclaimer saying that knowledge of Ruby/Watir is necessary and that the
> > recorder has limitations and may not be able to record everything?
> >
> > Am i being harsh with WebRecorder? The Watir WebRecorder page says
> > > "WebRecorder is designed to speed up the creation of web testing and web
> > > automation scripts." I'm cool with that. But commercial WebRecorder it is
> > > billed as "No Programming Skills Required". I haven't looked at this version
> > > of the tool, but i'm pretty skeptical about this claim.
> > >
> >
> > As I said, I can stand by that claim just on the basis of the sort of
> > people that are using Macro Scheduler and MacroScript WebRecorder.  That
> > said while in many cases no programming skills are required, they do help!
> > Many people with no prior programming skills have used WebRecorder/Macro
> > Scheduler to create pretty amazing scripts (but have gained programming
> > skills along the way).
> >
> > With Watir WebRecorder however, I would expect people using Watir
> > WebRecorder to understand Watir/Ruby to start with.  I will try to make that
> > clearer.
> >
> > --
> > Marcus Tettmar
> > http://www.mjtnet.com/
> > Macro Scheduler & WebRecorder for Windows & Web Automation and Testing.
> > WebRecorder for Ruby/Watir now available.
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wtr-general mailing list
> Wtr-general at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/wtr-general/attachments/20060221/4d8681a8/attachment.html 