I have several reasons why you do not need to include steps:
- When a tester gets comfortable with doing test cases they will often see the title of the test case, and simply run the test by heart.
- If a tester follows exact steps every time the test case is run, you get into a situation where you will not find bugs in the code. Think of a minefield. If you walk the same path all the time, what are your chances with finding a new mine? The same goes with testing.
- I have also been asked "If there are no steps, how will a new tester know what to do?" This is a legitimate question. My answers to this are:
- We work in an Agile environment and team members (I am trying to get away from using Testers and Developers) should be talking and working with one another. It is a great opportunity for a new team member to ask questions about how the product works and how they should test this feature. This will give a fresh prospective to the product as well.
- If a professional person working in high tech as a Tester is unable to figure out how a test case works, does that not mean that it is too difficult for the customer to use as well?
- By not giving exact steps it allows testers freedom to explore and build in ad-hoc testing. Not every tester is going to "Create a bookmark" in the same way. To get better coverage rotate who is tests what Area.
Mind map testing may not work for everyone, but I would like to hear your thoughts and experiences. What do you think works well? What can be improved?
Some topics still to cover are:
- Pros and cons
- Setting priority
- Test case execution
- Reporting on results
- Formatting
- Test case review
- Whole team approach
Some topics still to cover are:
- Pros and cons
- Setting priority
- Test case execution
- Reporting on results
- Formatting
- Test case review
- Whole team approach