Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Discussions > users > RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features?

maxq
Discussion topic

Back to topic list

RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features?

Author pombredanne
Full name Philippe Ombredanne
Date 2004-04-13 16:26:42 PDT
Message OK,
I have sent an email to James Cooper, the project lead for maxq to get
his direct feedback.
Let's wait a couple days before we make a move...
--
Cheers
Philippe

philippe ombredanne | nexB - Open IT Asset Management
1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne at nexb.com
http://www.nexb.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: petersm [mailto:petersm at venzia dot com]
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 12:22 PM
> To: users at maxq dot tigris dot org
> Subject: Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features?
>
>
> Frank Cohen
>
> > I like the idea too! And would like to participate in the design.
> >
> > By the way, there is another commercial company:
> >
> > http://www.soft.com/eValid/
>
> I looked briefly at this and it seems ok, but designed to be used by
> non-programmers to create tests. I think the aim of this
> project should be to
> create testing scripts that programmers would use and
> augment/modify as they
> see fit. I initially didn't see a way to manually edit the
> tests from the
> eValid thing.
>
> > that signed a license with Microsoft and uses IE as its Mozilla to
> > accomplish a test recorder environment.
> >
> > In my opinion, the DOM inspector is nice to have to not
> necessary. The
> > bigger issue will be to create a GUI that rides along with
> Mozilla to
> > let the user control/edit the scripts as they are being recorded.
> This is fairly straighforward using XUL (XML UserInterface
> Language) which is
> used by Mozilla and all it's plugins. The code would be
> written in javascript
> and the XPCom objects that Mozilla presents/creates. If you
> want to look at
> how this is done, go to xulplanet.com for descriptions/tutorials.
>
> After everyone has looked at how that is done I have this
> question... Is that
> how we want to do it? I think there are several pros and cons.
>
> Pros.
> - It's embedded in the browser which makes it easy and
> eliminates the need
> for a proxy and having to turn the proxy on and off.
> - the controls are right there for recording, etc the tests.
>
> Cons
> - It will be Mozilla specific. This doesn't really bother me
> since it's
> probably the most standards compliant browser out there and
> FireFox is gaining
> popularity.
> - It is written mostly in Javascript. On my initial
> investigations, I haven't
> found that other languages are available.
>
> If we don't go with the Mozilla plugin route, then we should
> probably just
> make these improvements to MaxQ itself instead of spinning
> off for this project.
>
> Personally, I think it would be cool to do it as a Mozilla
> plugin, but I think
> we should decide as a group.
>
> >I'm
> > thinking that most users will want to use the actual HMTL forms in
> > Mozilla to interact with the host. Also we need something
> to present a
> > simple GUI that controls playing a recorded session. For this I
> > contribute the design for TestMaker 5's recorder. I sent
> Philippe the
> > design document (that includes a screen shot walking tour
> of the GUI.)
> > I'll post this to the PushToTest site for your info.
> >
> > Also, at some point a Wiki for this new generation of MaxQ would be
> > handy. I can offer that on the PushToTest Web site if needed.
>
> Yet another good idea.
>
> Michael Peters
> Venzia
>
> --------------------​--------------------​--------------------​---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@ma​xq.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help at maxq dot tigris dot org
>
>
>
>



--------------------​--------------------​--------------------​---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@ma​xq.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help at maxq dot tigris dot org

« Previous message in topic | 14 of 14 | Next message in topic »

Messages

Show all messages in topic

[maxq-users] anybody want these features? petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> 2004-04-12 08:11:19 PDT
     RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? pombredanne Philippe Ombredanne 2004-04-12 08:44:52 PDT
         RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> 2004-04-12 09:03:17 PDT
             RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? pombredanne Philippe Ombredanne 2004-04-12 09:36:59 PDT
                 Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? fcohen Frank Cohen 2004-04-12 10:07:00 PDT
                     RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? pombredanne Philippe Ombredanne 2004-04-12 10:14:47 PDT
                         Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? James Cooper <pixel at bitmechanic dot com> James Cooper <pixel at bitmechanic dot com> 2004-04-13 16:35:28 PDT
                             Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? fcohen Frank Cohen 2004-04-13 16:49:41 PDT
                                 RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? pombredanne Philippe Ombredanne 2004-04-13 20:21:54 PDT
                                 Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? James Cooper <pixel at bitmechanic dot com> James Cooper <pixel at bitmechanic dot com> 2004-04-13 21:36:09 PDT
                                     Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? fcohen Frank Cohen 2004-04-14 07:10:10 PDT
                                         Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> 2004-04-14 07:56:46 PDT
                     Re: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> petersm <petersm at venzia dot com> 2004-04-12 12:22:13 PDT
                         RE: [maxq-users] anybody want these features? pombredanne Philippe Ombredanne 2004-04-13 16:26:42 PDT
Messages per page: