CaseyR wrote:Hiya.
Do you think it's better to giver users an option to skip an error and proceed to further tests?
For example. I found errors of our system on the main frame, and eValid caught it nicely. But if the bug is not fixed, the other page element display is not so right. If the error detection is marked, and we can skip it treat it as if it has been fixed, then the other error findings will not depend on this one.
Thanks
Hi CaseyR.
A good question
A long time ago we thought about having eValid simply ignore errors and continue along into the script and that is indeed what it actually does.
But as you found out, when there is one error in the playback the rest of the playback usually doesn't make a lot of sense.
So we left the feature as it is -- playback continues, but at the peril of a coherent test -- and we ADDED the ability to FLAG various kinds of playback faults from page failure to timeout to validation failure etc.
Here is a short explanation:
http://www.e-Valid.com/Products/Documen ... rting.html But we ALSO included a "branch on error" capability with the "OnErrorGoscript" command family.
There's a command for each type of problem: Alarm, Error, Timeout, Warning, and the way the command works is that control of the playback picks up at the named playback script. Usually, this is a script that ends the playback politely, e.g. by doing a complete signoff. But it could be anything you wish.
To summarize: eValid detects various types of errors, and provides a way to alter post-detection playback with the OnErrorGoScript command group.
-- eValid Support
