tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405476812031211238.post5352356698774491496..comments2023-07-12T18:09:56.569-04:00Comments on Rhythm of Testing: Keeping Things SimplePete Walenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10651704389491850533noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405476812031211238.post-74025154468321558862013-04-20T18:01:51.719-04:002013-04-20T18:01:51.719-04:00Broadly speaking, I agree. About the (2) I think ...Broadly speaking, I agree. About the (2) I think "Purpose" or "Intent" might be better. Let me think on that. <br /><br />The rest is, alas, an on-going cycle. I've seen some really good work and some that is less good. I am a firm believer in /galumphing/ and use it. My concern is that instead of exercising one or two things at a pass, these tests exercise many things. The result is that when something behaves unexpectedly, tracking down the behavior is a huge challenge.<br /><br />I prefer to establish how "function A" behaves, then "function B" then "function C". From that point on, the real fun begins. How does "function A" behave when "function B" is also in play? What about C? What about all 3?<br /><br />Pressed for time right now. Your comment is deserving of more thought.<br /><br />Thanks for contributing.<br /><br />P. Pete Walenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10651704389491850533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405476812031211238.post-52394651766892683802013-04-20T17:43:44.508-04:002013-04-20T17:43:44.508-04:00I'd like to suggest something a little differe...I'd like to suggest something a little different.<br /><br />0. When they're not doing what you think you're telling them to do, treat that as information.<br /><br />That is, instead of rebuking them for not following instructions, observe them to find out what the problem is. Maybe the problem is that they're trying to test, rather than to check.<br /><br />Related to your (2) above, before you state what the goal of the test is, ask what the goal of the test is. The goal of the test, presumably, is to reveal problems in the product. Why are you giving them an explicit set of instructions at all? Will a prescriptive set of actions do that? Or could a more open-ended assignment make productive use of natural human variability to expose problems<br /><br />Be careful of simplification, too. A simple process—or a simple test (check) may not reveal problems that a more elaborate test might. Simplification can be good when you're looking at something simple, like a particular function or a relatively small and uncomplicated task. But don't underestimate the value of complex actions, rich scenarios, and <a href="http://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/467" rel="nofollow">galumphing</a>.<br /><br />Finally, I'd like to suggest that Google fixes the usability problems in Blogger, but that's fodder for another LONG series of posts.<br /><br />---Michael B.Michael Bolton http://www.developsense.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09027725699187903416noreply@blogger.com