On Tue, 9 May 2006, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > We could have automated tests but many things must be tested manually. > For example my math manual is build upon sequences to create a formula, > e.g. the sequence: > A_u uparrow ^2 > should create an "A" with the subscript "u" and the superscript "2". To > have a look how it should look there is a PDF-file for the testers to > compare. If a sequence doesn't produce the expected results you found a > bug. (Btw. this case is bug 2581).
When comes to cases like this, maybe it'd be possible to semi-automate the test as follows: * The tester is instructed to copy a command sequence that does what is to be tested into the mini-buffer. This then hopefully results in the correct output. * In the next step the tester compares the view on screen with a screendump that's shown on the wiki page. It'll be a bit time consuming to come up with the right command sequence, so initially it's perhaps better to just give the tester instructions on what to type. However, if there was someway to have LyX output some command sequence that could later be pasted, creating that part would be much quicker. /C -- Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
