IWMW 2002: QA for Web Sites: Approaches to Testing
Download as PPT, PDF0 likes122 views
The document outlines various approaches to website testing, emphasizing the importance of both automated and manual testing methods. Automated testing is suitable for large websites but may not capture all usability issues, while manual testing can effectively identify problems, especially in new sites, though it is not feasible for large volumes of pages. Peer review is suggested as a valuable practice for collaboration and improving website quality, highlighting the need for structured feedback management.
IWMW 2002: QA for Web Sites: Approaches to Testing
- 1. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk QA For Web Sites: Approaches To Testing Brian Kelly UKOLN University of Bath Bath, BA2 7AY Email B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk URL http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ UKOLN is supported by:
- 2. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk 2 Automated Testing Automated Testing: • Should be scalable • Only suitable approach for large Web sites • Can push (email) information about problems • Many free automated testing tools available but: • Will not spot all usability / accessibility problems • Can provide too much information • Comprehensive and configurable testing tools can be expensive
- 3. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk 3 Manual Testing Manual Testing: • Can spot usability / accessibility problems • Can make use of one’s community / user base / peers • Can use of key pages which will identify problems which occur elsewhere • Particularly useful for testing new Web sites • “5 users can spot most of your problems” but: • Not suitable for testing large numbers of pages • Quality of feedback may be variable • Often not useful for testing established Web sites
- 4. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk 4 Approaches To Automated Testing Automated testing can make use of: • Desktop tools • Web-based tools UKOLN has made use of Web-based testing tools: • Monitor accessibility, HTML, CSS, compliance, page size, links quality, nos. of links, etc. • Benchmarking approach provides comparison with one’s peers • See, for example, <http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/ events/conferences/ucisa-tlig-2002/ benchmarking/>
- 5. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk 5 Benchmarking (2)
- 6. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk 6 Peer Review Peer Review: • “Give me comments on my Web site and I’ll also test yours” • Can help in community-building • Particularly useful for programmes in which project Web sites being developed at same time But: • Can be difficult in processing unstructured responses • Need to manage process
- 7. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk 7 Managing Peer Reviews UKOLN is developed a peer review system to support its advisory service for NOF-digi projects
- 8. A centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk 8 Conclusions To conclude: • There is probably a need to make use of both automated and manual approaches to testing • You can use these approaches within your own department / organisation • There are advantages to be gained in working with one’s peers • How should we do this?