Mailingliste - Einträge 2005


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [qftestJUI] name uniqueness and component visibility


  • Subject: Re: [qftestJUI] name uniqueness and component visibility
  • From: Gregor Schmid <Gregor.Schmid@?.de>
  • Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 20:31:53 -0000

Hello Martin,

excellent question. I think few people have ever read that section in
the manual or thought about component recognition that much.

The answer to your questions is that neither 1) nor 2) is quite
correct. qftestJUI determines visibility using the isShowing() method
which is very close to 1), including the case of a tabbed pane.
However, I recently learned that the analogy to 1) breaks down in case
of a CardLayout where Java consideres all components to be showing,
not just the topmost one that is visible to the human eye.

There is no difference between standard recognition and name override
as far as visibility is concerned.

I hope I've answered your questions completely, if not, please ask
again.

Best regards,
    Greg

Martin Elmer Jørgensen <mej@?.dk> writes:

>    Hello all
>
>
>    I am studying section 18.2 of the QFtest manual (for version 1.04.3)
>    to clarify the scope of the required component name uniqueness.
>
>
>    QUESTION 1
>
>    Speaking of the standard recognition algorithm, at the end of
>    paragraph 4, it says "Components that aren't visible are not
>    considered." What kind of visibility is meant? Which of the following
>    interpretations is correct?
>
>
>    Uniqueness requires that
>
>    1)       all simultaneously (to the human eye) visible components in
>    the same window on screen have different names
>
>    2)       in the same window, all components whose isVisible() method
>    returns true have different names
>
>
>    Say I have a tabbed pane with tabs A and B. On tab A there is a button
>    with name "save" and on B there is a button with name "save". Since
>    tab A and tab B will not be simultaneously visible to the human eye,
>    according to interpretation 1), uniqueness is achieved even though the
>    two buttons have the same name. But according to interpretation 2),
>    uniqueness is not achieved, because isVisible() is true for both
>    buttons.
>
>
>    QUESTION 2
>
>    In the same section 18.2, speaking of the recognition algorithm used
>    when "name overrides everything" is turned ON, the last paragraph ends
>    with a sentence: "The prerequisite for using this method is that you
>    can guarantee that if a name is set on a component, it is going to be
>    unique among the simultaneously visible components of the same class
>    in one window." This is the formulation that lead me to think of
>    interpretation 1) above.
>
>
>    Is there any difference in the significance of visibility between on
>    one hand, using the standard recognition algorithm, and on the other
>    hand, having "name overrides everything" turned on?
>
>    Med venlig hilsen / Regards
>    Martin Elmer Jørgensen
>    Systems Engineer, MSc C.S.
>    Systematic Software Engineering A/S
>    Søren Frichs Vej 39, DK-8000 Aarhus C
>    Tel.:   +45 8943 2184 (direct)
>    Fax:   +45 8943 2020
>    Web:  [1]www.systematic.dk

--
Gregor Schmid                                Gregor.Schmid@?.de
Quality First Software GmbH                     http://www.qfs.de
Tulpenstr. 41                                Tel: +49 8171 919870
DE-82538 Geretsried                          Fax: +49 8171 919876



Videos Downloads Dokumentation Kaufen Gratis Testen