I am trying to automate gmail page (for some kind of email verification), after input username and password, I want to wait the page to fully loaded before continuing to my next action.
This is what I tried:
Selenium2Library.Input Text //input[contains(#id, "identifierId")] ${local_email_username}
Selenium2Library.Click Element //span[text()="Berikutnya"]
Sleep 2s
Selenium2Library.Wait Until Element Is Visible //input[contains(#name, "password")] timeout=30s
Selenium2Library.Input Password //input[contains(#name, "password")] ${local_email_password}
Selenium2Library.Click Element //span[text()="Berikutnya"]
Sleep 2s
Selenium2Library.Wait Until Element Is Visible //input[contains(#aria-label, "Search")] timeout=30s
### should be logged in to gmail
Log >>> logged in to gmail. sleeping..
Sleep 5s
### make sure the email page fully loaded
Log >>> making sure the email page fully loaded.. waiting new conversation button appeared
Comment Wait Until Keyword Succeeds 10x 2s Selenium2Library.Page Should Contain ${email_name}
Wait Until Keyword Succeeds 20x 3s Selenium2Library.Page Should Contain Element //button[contains(#title, 'New conversation')]
Log >>> email page fully loaded. start searching activation email...
What I want to achieve is waiting for the new conversation button, that indicates that page is fully loaded (//button[contains(#title, 'New conversation')])
The problem is the script never finds the button. I tried to inspect and search for that xpath, and the element found.
Is there any solution for that?
Update:
i tried using Select Frame like this.. like #Gaurav said.. here's the code:|
Selenium2Library.Select Frame ${iframe_locator}
Wait Until Keyword Succeeds 20x 3s Selenium2Library.Page Should Contain Element //button[contains(#title, 'New conversation')]
Selenium2Library.Unselect Frame
where ${iframe_locator} is //body/div[7]/div[3]/div[1]/div[2]/div[1]/div[1]/div[3]/div[1]/div[1]/div[2]/div[1]/iframe[2]
but still no luck
The button is in iFrame, so you need to switch to that iFrame(there might be more iframes, so you need to switch to that specific one) and the look for //button[contains(#title, 'New conversation')]
Here is Corresponding Java Implementation
#Test
public void newConversation() throws IOException, InterruptedException{
driver.get("https://www.google.com/intl/hi/gmail/about/");
driver.findElement(By.linkText("प्रवेश करें")).click();
driver.findElement(By.id("identifierId")).sendKeys("*********#gmail.com");
driver.findElement(By.id("identifierNext")).click();
Thread.sleep(30000);
driver.switchTo().frame(5);
WebElement element = driver.findElement(By.xpath("//div[contains(#aria-label,'Change profile picture')]"));
Actions action = new Actions(driver);
action.moveToElement(element).build().perform();
driver.findElement(By.xpath("//button[contains(#title,'New conversation')]")).click();
}
I am working on a website and trying to test it with Selenium and jUnit. I'm getting race conditions between the test and the site, despite my best efforts.
The front end of the site is HTML and jQuery. The back end (via AJAX) is PHP.
The site
I have two required text input fields (year and age), plus some others that I'm not changing in the tests that give problems. As soon as both text inputs are non-empty, an AJAX call is made to the back end. This will return 0+ results. If 0 results are returned, a results div on the screen gets some text saying that there were no results. If >0 results are returned, a table is written to the results div showing the results.
I don't want the site to wait until e.g. 4 digits' worth of year is entered before doing the AJAX call as it could be looking at ancient history (yes, really). So, as soon as both are non-empty the call should be made. If you type slowly, this means that entering e.g. 2015 will trigger calls for year=2, year=20, year=201 and year=2015. (This is OK.)
The test
I'm using page objects - one for the inputs and one for the output. At the start of the test, I wait for a prompt to be present on the screen (please enter some data) as that is generated by JavaScript that checks the state of the input fields - so I know that the page has loaded and JavaScript has run.
The wait for a prompt is made immediately after the page object is created for the output. This is the relevant method in the page object:
// Wait until the prompt / help text is displayed. Assumes that the prompt text always contains the word "Please"
public void waitForText() {
wait.until(ExpectedConditions.textToBePresentInElementLocated(By.id("resultContainer"), "Please"));
}
The method for setting the year is
public void setYear(String year){
WebElement yearField = driver.findElement(By.id(yearInputId));
if (yearField == null) {
// This should never happen
Assert.fail("Can't find year input field using id " + yearInputId);
} else {
yearField.sendKeys(new String [] {year});
driver.findElement(By.id(ageInputId)).click(); // click somewhere else
}
}
and there's a corresponding one for age.
I have a series of methods that wait for things to happen, which don't seem to have prevented the problem (below). These do things like wait for the current result values to be different from a previous snapshot of them, wait for a certain number of results to be returned etc.
I create a driver for Chrome as follows:
import org.openqa.selenium.chrome.ChromeDriver;
// ...
case CHROME: {
System.setProperty("webdriver.chrome.driver", "C:\\path\\chromedriver.exe");
result = new ChromeDriver();
break;
}
The problem
Some of the time, things work OK. Some of the time, both inputs are filled in with sensible values by the test, but the "there are 0 results" message is displayed. Some of the time, the test hangs part-way through filling in the inputs. It seems to be fine when I'm testing with Firefox, but Chrome often fails.
The fact that there is unpredictable behaviour suggests that I'm not controlling all the things I need to (and / or my attempts to control things are wrong). I can't see that I'm doing anything particularly weird, so someone must have hit these kinds of issue before.
Is there a browser issue I'm not addressing?
Is there something I'm doing wrong in setting the values?
Is there something I'm doing wrong in my test choreography?
It could be that when you start typing, the script is still loading or that there's a pending Ajax call when you start handling the next field or validation.
You could try to synchronize the calls with a low level script :
const String JS_WAIT_NO_AJAX =
"var callback = arguments[0]; (function fn(){ " +
" if(window.$ && window.$.active == 0) " +
" return callback(); " +
" setTimeout(fn, 60); " +
"})();";
JavascriptExecutor js = (JavascriptExecutor)driver;
driver.manage().timeouts().setScriptTimeout(20, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
js.executeAsyncScript(JS_WAIT_NO_AJAX);
driver.findElement(By.Id("...")).sendKeys("...");
js.executeAsyncScript(JS_WAIT_NO_AJAX);
driver.findElement(By.Id("...")).click();
I am new in appium. I am running following test for IOS
#Test
public void Login() throws InterruptedException{
Thread.sleep(3000);
driver.findElement(By.xpath("//window[1]/textfield[9]")).sendKeys("john");
driver.findElement(By.xpath("//window[1]/secure[1]")).sendKeys("asdf1234");
driver.findElement(By.name("btn checkbox")).click();
driver.findElement(By.name("Login")).click();
Thread.sleep(6000);
here it works fine, it logins, but when I comment driver.findElement(By.name("btn checkbox")).click(); this line it does not login, but shows test is passed, there is no single exception
please can anybody tell me what is problem here?
It seems that your test doesn't check if it's logged in or not. You're performing the actions to make it login, but you're not actually validating anything. You're smoke testing.
What you want to do here...
Build something that lets you check for any indicator that you have finished the login process. (like welcome label!)
Use an explicit wait to do this.
Define your success criteria. Login usually takes 10 seconds. Our success criteria may be anything under 25 seconds.
If it doesn't find the element after 25 seconds in the exception that's thrown (TimeoutException), you should return something like "None", else return the element.
Should look something like this:
WebElement welcomeLabel = (new WebDriverWait(driver, 25))
.until(ExpectedConditions.presenceOfElementLocated(By.name("welcomeLabel")));
And then you'll say something like this:
Assert.assertIsNotNone(welcomeLabel) this assertion is what makes this NOT a smoke test
Of course that's happening. The only thing you do is clicking on that button. Appium is doing exactly that, doesn't encounter any problem, and returns a 'test passed'.
You have to write some kind of a test yourself, to know if you're logged in or not.
For example by searching for a logout button at the next page.
Example:
Assert.assertTrue(wd.findElement(By.name("Logout")).isDisplayed());
What is the best way to wait for an element to appear on a web page? I have read that we can use implicit wait and functions like webdriverwait, fluentwait etc and last but not the least thread.sleep()...which i use the most but want to stop using at all.
My scenario:
User logs in to a website...website checks the credentials and provides an offer to the user in the form of an overlay (kind of popup but not a separate window). I need to verify text on the the overlay.
There is a time gap between user signing in and the overlay getting displayed. what is the best approach so that selenium waits only till the time the element is not visible. As the overlay is not a separate page but part of the main page, implicit wait does not work at all.
All suggestions are welcome...:)
WebDriverWait wait = new WebDriverWait(driver, 20);
wait.until(ExpectedConditions.elementToBeClickable(By.id("optionsBuilderSelect_input")));
I'm a professional scraper (http://nitinsurana.com) I've written 30+ softwares using selenium and I've never faced any such issue, anyways above is a sample code.
All I can think of is that what until condition has to be checked because many a times elements are already visible, but they are not clickable and things like that. I guess you should give different options a try and I hope you'll find the one required.
Always start by using a implicit wait. I think Selenium defaults to 5 seconds and so if you do a driver.findElement(), the implication is that it will wait up to 5 seconds. That should do it. If you are experiencing a scenario where the time it takes is unpredictable, then use FluentWait (with the same 5 second timeout) but also using the .ignoring method and wrap that inside a while loop . Here is the basic idea:
int tries=0;
while ( tries < 3 ) {
//fluent wait (with .ignoring) inside here
tries ++1;
}
public boolean waitForElement(WebElement ele, String xpath, int seconds) throws InterruptedException{
//returns true if the xpath appears in the webElement within the time
//false when timed out
int t=0;
while(t<seconds*10){
if(ele.findElements(By.xpath(xpath)).size()>0)
return true;
else{
Thread.sleep(100);
t++;
continue;
}
}
System.out.println("waited for "+seconds+"seconds. But couldn't find "+xpath+ " in the element specified");
return false;
}
You could wait for the presence of the element to appear as follows:
new WebDriverWait(driver, 10).until(ExpectedConditions.presenceOfElementLocated(By.id("someId")));
I'm trying to put together my first Data Driven Test Framework that runs tests through Selenium Grid/WebDriver on multiple browsers. Right now, I have each test case in it's own class, and I parametrize the browser, so it runs each test case once with each browser.
Is this common on big test frameworks? Or, should each test case be copied and fine tuned to each browser in it's own class? So, if I'm testing chrome, firefox, and IE, should there be classes for each, like: "TestCase1Chrome", "TestCase1FireFox", "TestCase1IE"? Or just "TestCase1" and parametrize the test to run 3 times with each browser? Just wondering how others do it.
Parameterizing the tests into a single class per test case makes it easier to maintain the non-browser specific code, while duplicating classes, one for each browser case, makes it easier to maintain the browser-specific code. When I say browser specific code, for example, clicking an item. On ChromeDriver, you cannot click in the middle of some elements, where on FirefoxDriver, you can. So, you potentially need two different blocks of code just to click an element (when it's not clickable in the middle).
For those of you that are employed QA Engineers that use Selenium, what would be best practice here?
I am currently working on a project which runs around 75k - 90k tests on daily basis. We pass the browser as a parameter to the tests. Reasons being:
As you mentioned in your question, this helps in maintenance.
We don't see too many browser-specific code. If you are having too much of browser specific code, then I would say there is a problem with the webdriver itself. Because, one of the advantages of selenium/webdriver is write code once and run it against any supported browser.
The difference I see between my code structure and the one you mentioned in question is, I don't have a test class for each test case. Tests are divided based on the features that I test and each feature will have a class. And that class will hold all the tests as methods. I use testNG so that these methods can be invoked in parallel. May be this won't suite your AUT.
If you keep the code structure that you mention in the question, sooner or later maintaining it will become a nightmare. Try to stick to the rule: the same test code (written once) for all browsers (environments).
This condition will force you to solve two issues:
1) how to run the tests for all chosen browsers
2) how to apply specific browser workarounds without polluting the test code
Actually, this seems to be your question.
Here is how I solved the first issue.
First, I defined all the environments that I am going to test. I call 'environments' all the conditions under which I want to run my tests: browser name, version number, OS, etc. So, separately from test code, I created an enum like this:
public enum Environments {
FF_18_WIN7("firefox", "18", Platform.WINDOWS),
CHR_24_WIN7("chrome", "24", Platform.WINDOWS),
IE_9_WIN7("internet explorer", "9", Platform.WINDOWS)
;
private final DesiredCapabilities capabilities;
private final String browserName;
private final String version;
private final Platform platform;
Environments(final String browserName, final String version, final Platform platform) {
this.browserName = browserName;
this.version = version;
this.platform = platform;
capabilities = new DesiredCapabilities();
}
public DesiredCapabilities capabilities() {
capabilities.setBrowserName(browserName);
capabilities.setVersion(version);
capabilities.setPlatform(platform);
return this.capabilities;
}
public String browserName() {
return browserName;
}
}
It's easy to modify and add environments whenever you need to. As you can notice, I am using this to create and retrieve the DesiredCapabilities that later will be used to create a specific WebDriver.
In order to make the tests run for all the defined environments, I used JUnit's (4.10 in my case) org.junit.experimental.theories:
#RunWith(MyRunnerForSeleniumTests.class)
public class MyWebComponentTestClassIT {
#Rule
public MySeleniumRule selenium = new MySeleniumRule();
#DataPoints
public static Environments[] enviroments = Environments.values();
#Theory
public void sample_test(final Environments environment) {
Page initialPage = LoginPage.login(selenium.driverFor(environment), selenium.getUserName(), selenium.getUserPassword());
// your test code here
}
}
The tests are annotated as #Theory (not as #Test, like in normal JUnit tests) and are passed a parameter. Each test will run then for all the defined values of this parameter, which should be an array of values annotated as #DataPoints. Also, you should use a runner that extends from org.junit.experimental.theories.Theories. I use org.junit.rules to prepare my tests, putting there all the necessary plumbing. As you can see I get the specific capabilities driver through the Rule, too. Though you could use the following code right in your test:
RemoteWebDriver driver = new RemoteWebDriver(new URL(some_url_string), environment.capabilities());
The point is that having it in the Rule you write the code once and use it for all your tests.
As for Page class, it is a class where I put all the code that uses driver's functionality (find an element, navigate, etc.). This way, again, the test code stays neat and clear and, again, you write it once and use it in all your tests.
So, this is the solution for the first issue. (I know that you can do a similar thing with TestNG, but I didn't try it.)
To solve the second issue, I created a special package where I keep all the code of browser specific workarounds. It consists of an abstract class, e.g. BrowserSpecific, that contains the common code which happens to be different (or have a bug) in some browser. In the same package I have classes specific for every browser used in tests and each of them extends BrowserSpecific.
Here is how it works for the Chrome driver bug that you mention. I create a method clickOnButton in BrowserSpecific with the common code for the affected behaviour:
public abstract class BrowserSpecific {
protected final RemoteWebDriver driver;
protected BrowserSpecific(final RemoteWebDriver driver) {
this.driver = driver;
}
public static BrowserSpecific aBrowserSpecificFor(final RemoteWebDriver driver) {
BrowserSpecific browserSpecific = null;
if (Environments.FF_18_WIN7.browserName().contains(driver.getCapabilities().getBrowserName())) {
browserSpecific = new FireFoxSpecific(driver);
}
if (Environments.CHR_24_WIN7.browserName().contains(driver.getCapabilities().getBrowserName())) {
browserSpecific = new ChromeSpecific(driver);
}
if (Environments.IE_9_WIN7.browserName().contains(driver.getCapabilities().getBrowserName())) {
browserSpecific = new InternetExplorerSpecific(driver);
}
return browserSpecific;
}
public void clickOnButton(final WebElement button) {
button.click();
}
}
and then I override this method in the specific class, e.g. ChromeSpecific, where I place the workaround code:
public class ChromeSpecific extends BrowserSpecific {
ChromeSpecific(final RemoteWebDriver driver) {
super(driver);
}
#Override
public void clickOnButton(final WebElement button) {
// This is the Chrome workaround
String script = MessageFormat.format("window.scrollTo(0, {0});", button.getLocation().y);
driver.executeScript(script);
// Followed by common behaviour of all the browsers
super.clickOnButton(button);
}
}
When I have to take into account the specific behaviour of some browser, I do the following:
aBrowserSpecificFor(driver).clickOnButton(logoutButton);
instead of:
button.click();
This way, in my common code, I can identify easily where the workaround has been applied and I keep the workarounds isolated from the common code. I find it easy to maintain, as the bugs are usually being solved and the workarounds may or should be changed or eliminated.
One last word about executing the tests. As you are going to use Selenium Grid you will want to use the possibility to run the tests in parallel, so remember to configure this feature for your JUnit tests (available since v. 4.7).
We use testng in our organization and we use the parameter option that testng gives to specify the enviroment, i.e. the browser to use, the machine to run on and any other config that is required for env config. The browsername is sent through the xml file which controls what needs to run and where. It is set as a global variable. What we have done as an extra is, we have our custom annotations which can override these global variables i.e. if a test is very specifically only to be run on chrome and no other browser, then we specify the same on the custom annotation. So, no matter even if the parameter is say run on FF, if it is annotated with chrome, it would always run on chrome.
I somehow believe making one class for each browser is not a good idea. Imagine the flow changes or there is a bit of here and there and you have 3 classes to change instead of one. And if the number of browsers increase, then one more class.
What I would suggest is to have code that is browserspecific to be extracted out. So, if the click behavior is browser specific, then override to it to do appropriate checks or failure handlings based on browsers.
I do it like this but keep in mind that this is pure WebDriver without the Grid or RC in mind:
// Utility class snippet
// Test classes import this with: import static utility.*;
public static WebDriver driver;
public static void initializeBrowser( String type ) {
if ( type.equalsIgnoreCase( "firefox" ) ) {
driver = new FirefoxDriver();
} else if ( type.equalsIgnoreCase( "ie" ) ) {
driver = new InternetExplorerDriver();
}
driver.manage().timeouts().implicitlyWait( 10000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS );
driver.manage().window().setPosition(new Point(200, 10));
driver.manage().window().setSize(new Dimension(1200, 800));
}
Now, using JUnit 4.11+ your parameters file needs to look something like this:
firefox, test1, param1, param2
firefox, test2, param1, param2
firefox, test3, param1, param2
ie, test1, param1, param2
ie, test2, param1, param2
ie, test3, param1, param2
Then, using a single .CSV parameterized test class (that you intend to start multiple browser types with), in the #Before annotated method, do this:
If the current parameter test is the first test of this browser type, and no already open windows exist, open a new browser window of the current type.
If a browser is already open and the browser type is the same, then just re-use the same driver object.
if a browser is open of a different type that the current test, then close the browser and re-open a browser of the correct type.
Of course, my answer doesn't tell you how to handle the parameters: I leave that for you to figure out.