Environment based data driven automated test engine for GUI applications

• US 20030056150A1
• Filed: 09/14/2001
• Published: 03/20/2003
• Est. Priority Date: 09/14/2001
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Unify Inc. (Atos SE)
• Original Assignee: Siemens Communications Incorporated (Siemens AG)
• Inventors: Dubovsky, David
• Granted Patent: US 6,961,873 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 714/38
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/3688 for test execution, e.g. scheduling of test suites

Abstract

The invention includes a scriptable GUI test tool which generates a GUI map (or which includes a utility which generates a GUI map), at least one environment definition (parameter) file, at least one test data (driver) file, and an automated test engine. A separate environment definition file is provided for each feature of the GUI. Each environment definition file provides the abstract details required by the test engine in order to support common processes for different applications. The test data file is organized into rows of data where each row defines a single test and each column represents a parameter. The automated test engine is composed of a plurality of library modules written in the scripting language of the scriptable GUI test tool. The ATE is driven by the test data file and calls upon the GUI map and environment definition file. According to the presently preferred embodiment, the scriptable GUI test tool is WinRunner®. The environment definition files and the test data files are preferably generated with a spreadsheet program such a Microsoft Excel® and saved as comma delimited text files.

Claims

1. A system for testing the graphical user interface (GUI) of a software application comprising:

a) a scriptable GUI test tool which generates a GUI map;

b) at least one environment definition file;

c) at least one test data file; and

d) an automated test engine script, said automated test script interacting with said scriptable GUI test tool and reading from said at least one environmental definition file and said at least one test data file.

2. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

said automated test engine script is driven by said at least one test data file.

3. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

said at least one environment definition file includes a separate environment definition file for each feature of the GUI.

4. The system according to claim 3, wherein:

each environment definition file provides abstract details required by said automated test engine script in order to support common processes for different applications.

5. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

specific variables are initialized and defined as external data via said at least one environment definition file.

6. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

each of said at least one environment definition file includes an environment part and a parameters part.

7. The system according to claim 6, wherein:

said environment part includes Application Name, Launch Menu, Primary Window identification, Tab and related tab windows.

8. The system according to claim 6, wherein:

said parameters part include individual fields that appear in an application object.

9. The system according to claim 8, wherein:

the behavior of a parameter is defined by assigning a “

Type”

definition that has already been implemented in said automated test engine script.

10. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

it is possible to maintain application version compatibility in a single one of said at least one environment definition file by identifying parameter elements that are new to a specific version of an application.

11. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

values found in said at least one environment definition file are tightly bound to logical names that are used in said GUI map.

12. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

said at least one test data file is organized into rows and columns of data where each row defines a single test and each column represents a parameter.

13. The system according to claim 12, wherein:

multiple rows of data in said at least one test data file are required in order to facilitate or verify the results of an individual test.

14. The system according to claim 13, wherein:

each of said multiple rows of data begins with a first line of data containing a definition of default values that are expected for each parameter.

15. The system according to claim 14, wherein:

said first line of data is followed by one or more rows of individual data driven tests.

16. The system according to claim 15, wherein:

each of said one or more rows includes standard fields and data specific for each field of an object being tested.

17. The system according to claim 16, wherein:

said standard fields include a Test ID, Preamble and Postamble action, Expected Result indication and a Comment.

18. The system according to claim 17, wherein:

Preamble and Postamble actions are application specific and represent user actions required to establish a starting point for a test and an action to perform to execute a desired test.

19. The system according to claim 17, wherein:

Test ID is reported in a log file for tracking purposes.

20. The system according to claim 17, wherein:

said expected result field indicates whether a test will pass completely or fail during data entry, during the execution of the postamble or during verification after the postamble action has been executed.

21. The system according to claim 16, wherein:

data that appears in individual fields of a data driven test are specific for a parameter, operation or use of said field.

22. The system according to claim 21, wherein:

said fields can be ignored, changed, left alone or ignored for Query operations.

23. The system according to claim 22, wherein:

data can also represent multiple columns of a table structure.

24. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

said automated test engine script includes a plurality of library modules written in the scripting language of the scriptable GUI test tool.

25. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

said automated test engine script is driven by said test data file and calls upon said GUI map and said environment definition file.

26. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

said scriptable GUI test tool is WinRunner®

.

27. The system according to claim 1, wherein:

said environment definition files and said test data files are generated with a spreadsheet program and saved as comma delimited text files.

53. The method according to claim 27, wherein:

the scriptable GUI test tool is WinRunner®

.

54. The method according to claim 27, wherein:

the environment definition files and the test data files are generated with a spreadsheet program and saved as comma delimited text files.

28. A method for testing the graphical user interface (GUI) of a software application comprising:

a) generating a GUI map with a scriptable GUI test tool;

b) generating an environment definition file;

c) generating a test data file; and

d) generating an automated test engine script, wherein

the automated test script interacts with the scriptable GUI test tool and reads from the environmental definition file and the test data file.

29. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

the automated test engine script is driven by the test data file.

30. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

said step of generating an environment definition file includes generating a separate environment definition file for each feature of the GUI.

31. The method according to claim 30, wherein:

each environment definition file provides abstract details required by the automated test engine script in order to support common processes for different applications.

32. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

specific variables are initialized and defined as external data via the environment definition file.

33. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

the environment definition file includes an environment part and a parameters part.

34. The method according to claim 33, wherein:

the environment part includes Application Name, Launch Menu, Primary Window identification, Tab and related tab windows.

35. The method according to claim 33, wherein:

the parameters part include individual fields that appear in an application object.

36. The method according to claim 35, wherein:

the behavior of a parameter is defined by assigning a “

Type”

definition that has already been implemented in the automated test engine script.

37. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

application version compatibility is maintained in a single environment definition file by identifying parameter elements that are new to a specific version of an application.

38. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

values found in the environment definition file are tightly bound to logical names that are used in the GUI map.

39. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

the test data file is organized into rows and columns of data where each row defines a single test and each column represents a parameter.

40. The method according to claim 39, wherein:

multiple rows of data in the test data file are required in order to facilitate or verify the results of an individual test.

41. The method according to claim 40, wherein:

each of the multiple rows of data begins with a first line of data containing a definition of default values that are expected for each parameter.

42. The method according to claim 41, wherein:

the first line of data is followed by one or more rows of individual data driven tests.

43. The method according to claim 42, wherein:

each of the one or more rows includes standard fields and data specific for each field of an object being tested.

44. The method according to claim 43, wherein:

the standard fields include a Test ID, Preamble and Postamble action, Expected Result indication and a Comment.

45. The method according to claim 44, wherein:

Preamble and Postamble actions are application specific and represent user actions required to establish a starting point for a test and an action to perform to execute a desired test.

46. The method according to claim 44, wherein:

Test ID is reported in a log file for tracking purposes.

47. The method according to claim 44, wherein:

the expected result field indicates whether a test will pass completely or fail during data entry, during the execution of the postamble or during verification after the postamble action has been executed.

48. The method according to claim 43, wherein:

data that appears in individual fields of a data driven test are specific for a parameter, operation or use of the field.

49. The method according to claim 48, wherein:

the fields are one of ignored, changed, left alone or ignored for Query operations.

50. The method according to claim 49, wherein:

data represents multiple columns of a table structure.

51. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

the automated test engine script includes a plurality of library modules written in the scripting language of the scriptable GUI test tool.

52. The method according to claim 28, wherein:

the automated test engine script is driven by the test data file and calls upon the GUI map and the environment definition file.