domain driven design
We could put on those glasses to look at language domains, but there are a lot of domains. The way any two human beings communicate could be a domain, as two friends have almost their own language and expectations from years of shared conversations and interests and tacit understanding of value and consent. Even an interaction of two strangers becomes a confluence of two particular personalities and worldviews. Two people talking at home might be one domain, and those two people talking at work might be another domain, and again for down the pub or in a meeting or based on who else is listening.
If we want to we could say that there is an enormous set of domain-dependent heuristics that guide test term communications within any specified domain or subdomain. But I think we’re then saying “people say what they need to, when they need to, how they need to, to whom they need to”, which seems to fight against the affordances of naming conventions.
So let’s get down to cases. What concrete problem is solved, in the context of testing terms used within a business, by naming conventions that is not solved by clarifying statements in communication?
I haven’t really looked into this site to know if it’s worth anything, but maybe this can help guide someone in the right direction?
When I’ve been searching these glossaries I tend to look up the same things, because I inevitably find that I have problems with certain terms.
Automated testing: Automated testing describes any form of testing where a computer runs the tests rather than a human. Typically, this means automated UI testing . The aim is to get the computer to replicate the test steps that a human tester would perform.
So this seems to gloss over that testing cannot be automated, and a computer “running a test” is fundamentally different from a human “running a test”. It conflates a test in the sense of the act of testing, and a “test” as an artefact. It’s asking us to try to do the impossible.
Test: A test is the specific set of steps designed to verify a particular feature. Tests exist in both manual and automated testing. Some tests are extremely simple, consisting of just a few steps. Others are more complex and may even include branches. At Functionize, tests are produced by our ALP™ engine. See also Test plan and Test step .
This isn’t what test means to me at all. Testing is something done by a thinking human, and a specific set of steps is an incredibly limited example of a subset of testing. A set of instructions on how to look for a particular problem isn’t a test, but a person attempting to follow those instructions is testing.
The rest of the thinking is much aligned with this particular view of testing, where testing is a series of robotic actions codified into test cases and performed with tools as a replacement for human thinking, whereas my view of testing puts the human tester at the controls and all of the codification and tooling as part of their responsibilities.