I would like to add the vertical pipes so that I can have my data table down there under "Examples" feature in Specflow. Anyone to give me any tip so I can go through it?. My scenario outline looks like:
#mytag
Scenario Outline: Check Noun Words
Given Access the AnalyzeStateless URL
And language code
And content of <Sentence>
And the Expected KeyWord <Expected KeyWords>
And the Expected Family ID <Expected FID>
And the index <Index>
When return the XML response
Then the keyword should contain <FamilyID>
Examples:
| Index | Sentence | Expected KeyWords | Expected FID |
| 1 | I need a personal credit card | personal | 92289 |
The "Examples" feature has been manually entered in above case. I have a thousand of rows on an excel file, any appropriate way to get all of the values in one go?
Have you looked at Specflow.Excel which allows you to keep your examples in your excel files?
Related
I have a table in README.md file in TFS like this:
| Tables | Are | Cool |
| ------------- |:-------------:| -----:|
| col 3 is | right-aligned | $1600 |
| col 2 is | centered | $12 |
| zebra stripes | are neat | $1 |
It's work. But I need to shift this table to the right by tab character. And if I place tab (or space character) before table rows it's not recognize as table and just print as plain text. HTML tag also doesn't work in TFS.
How I can move table?
Unfortunately shift table is not supported in Markdown.
Markdown does not provide any special syntax for tables.
Please see Syntax guidance for Markdown files, widgets, wikis, and pull request comments for details.
I can think of is that you can capture a screenshot for the table, render the captured image, check in the image, then Add image to your Markdown file.
But please note that just as Waylan mention in below comments : For screenshot of a table, the text will no longer be searchable and cannot be copy and pasted by the user. And any future edits will require recreating the entire table.
I am looking for a solution to extract the list of concepts that a text (or html) document is about. I'd like the concepts to be wikidata topics (or freebase or DBpedia).
For example "Bad is a song by Mikael Jackson" should return Michael Jackson (the artist, wikidata Q2831) and Bad (the song, wikidata Q275422). As this example shows, the system should be robust to spelling mistakes (Mikael) and ambiguity (Bad).
Ideally the system should work across multiple languages, it should work both on short texts and long texts, and when it is unsure it should return multiple topics (eg. Bad song + Bad album). Also, it should ideally be open source and have a python API.
Yes, that sounds like a list for Santa Claus. Any ideas?
Edit
I checked out a few solutions, but no silver bullet so far.
NLTK parses text and extract "named entities" (AFAIU, a part of a sentence that refers to a name), but it does not return Wikidata topics, just plain text. This means that it will likely not understand that "I shot the sheriff" is the name of a song by Bob Marley, it will instead treat this as a sentence.
OpenNLP does roughly the same.
Wikidata has a search API, but it's just one term at a time, and it does not handle disambiguation.
There are a few commercial services (OpenCalais, AlchemyAPI, CogitoAPI...) but none really shines, IMHO.
You can use Spacy to retrieve Named Entity then link them to WikiData using the search API.
For what remains of the sentence that is not matched as named entity by Spacy you can create a list of ngrams from the sentence starting with the biggest ngram you use the WikiData search API to lookup WikiData topics.
POS tagging can be put to good use, that said syntax parse informations is more powerful since you can know the relations between the words. For instance given the following output from link-grammar:
Found 8 linkages (8 had no P.P. violations)
Linkage 1, cost vector = (UNUSED=0 DIS= 0.15 LEN=9)
+-------------------------Xp-------------------------+
+----------->WV---------->+ |
+-------Wd------+ +---------Osn--------+ |
| +---G---+----Ss---+----Os----+ | |
| | | | | | |
LEFT-WALL Bob.m Marley[!] wrote.v-d Natural[!] Mystic[!] .
You can tell that the subject is “Bob Marley” because
“wrote” is connected to “Marley” with a S which connects subject nouns to finite verbs.
“Marley” is connected to “Bob” using a G which connects proper noun together.
So a “Bob Marley” is a good candidate for an entity (also it has both word capitalized).
Given the above parse "tree" it difficult to tell whether “Natural” and “Mystic” are related even if they are on the same side of the sentence.
The second parse provided by link grammar has the same cost vector and links together “Natural Mystic” with again a G.
Here is it:
Linkage 2, cost vector = (UNUSED=0 DIS= 0.15 LEN=9)
+-------------------------Xp-------------------------+
+----------->WV---------->+ |
+-------Wd------+ +---------Os---------+ |
| +---G---+----Ss---+ +----G----+ |
| | | | | | |
LEFT-WALL Bob.m Marley[!] wrote.v-d Natural[!] Mystic[!] .
So in my opinion “Bob Marley” and “Natural Mystic” are good candidate for a wikidata search.
That was the easy problem where grammar and spelling are correct.
Here is one parse out of 11 of the same sentence with lower cases:
Linkage 1, cost vector = (UNUSED=1 DIS= 0.15 LEN=14)
+------------------------Xp------------------------+
+----------------------Wa---------------------+ |
| +------------------AN-----------------+ |
| | +-------------AN-------------+ |
| | | +----AN---+ |
| | | | | |
LEFT-WALL Bob.m marley[?].n [wrote] natural.n mystic.n .
LG doesn't even recognize the verb.
I am new to BDD specflow.
I have to write a scenario wherein after I capture an image, i have to select a value for each defined attribute for that image from a selection list
For Eg:
|Body Part |Location |Group |
| Leg | Left | Skin |
| Hand | Upper | Burn |
| Arm | Right | Ulcer |
I need a way in which i can select a different value for each attribute, every time.
Thanks in advance!
You are looking for Scenario Outline;
Scenario outlines allow us to more concisely express these examples through the use of a template with placeholders, using Scenario Outline, Examples with tables and < > delimited parameters.
Specflow takes each line in the Example table and create from the line a scenario to execute.
I am testing out F# and using NUnit as my test library; I have discovered the use of double-back ticks to allow arbitrary method naming to make my method names even more human readable.
I was wondering, whether rightly or wrongly, if it is possible to parameterise the method names when using NUnit's TestCaseAttribute to change the method name, for example:
[<TestCase("1", 1)>]
[<TestCase("2", 2)>]
let ``Should return #expected when "#input" is supplied`` input expected =
...
This might not be exactly what you need, but if you want to go beyond unit testing, then TickSpec (a BDD framework using F#) has a nice feature where it lets you write parameterized scenarios based on back-tick methods that contain regular expressions as place holders.
For example, in Phil Trelford's blog post, he uses this to define tic-tac-toe scenario:
Scenario: Winning positions
Given a board layout:
| 1 | 2 | 3 |
| O | O | X |
| O | | |
| X | | X |
When a player marks X at <row> <col>
Then X wins
Examples:
| row | col |
| middle | right |
| middle | middle |
| bottom | middle |
The method that implements the When clause of the scenario is defined in F# using something like this:
let [<When>] ``a player marks (X|O) at (top|middle|bottom) (left|middle|right)``
(mark:string,row:Row,col:Col) =
let y = int row
let x = int col
Debug.Assert(System.String.IsNullOrEmpty(layout.[y].[x]))
layout.[y].[x] <- mark
This is a neat thing, but it might be an overkill if you just want to write a simple parameterized unit test - BDD is useful if you want to produce human readable specifications of different scenarios (and there are actually other people reading them!)
This is not possible.
The basic issue is that for every input and expected you need to create a unique function. You would then need to pick the correct function to call (or your stacktrace wouldn't make sense). As a result this is not possible.
Having said that if you hacked around with something like eval (which must exist inside fsi), it might be possible to create something like this, but it would be very slow.
I am relatively new to BDD and I have a question regarding scenario outlines. When looking at samples over the internet I have the feeling that the placeholders can take any values. The number of elements in their domain is not restricted. Here is one example:
Scenario Outline: eating
Given there are <start> cucumbers
When I eat <eat> cucumbers
Then I should have <left> cucumbers
Examples:
| start | eat | left |
| 12 | 5 | 7 |
| 20 | 5 | 15 |
The placeholder <start> for example can be any number so the number of values is infinite.
In my specs I have to deal with contracts which can have one of four states (planned, ongoing, paused, and closed). My specs say that I can edit planned contracts but I am not allowed to edit contracts which have one of the remaining three states.
I think I would write a scenario named "Updating a planned contract" and one scenario outline where the status of a contract is a placeholder.
Scenario: Update a planned contract
Given the list of contracts as follows
| name | status | some value |
| c1 | planned | 123 |
And I have edited contract c1 as follows
| field | value |
| name | c1 |
| some value | 456 |
When I save contract c1
Then the list of contracts should be as follows
| name | status | some value |
| c1 | planned | 456 |
Scenario Outline: Update contract
Given there is a <status> contract
And I have edited that contract
When I save that contract
Then I an error 'only planned contracts are allowed to change' should be displayed
Examples:
| status |
| ongoing |
| paused |
| closed |
Is that the right way? One expicit scenario and one parameterized? Or should I write the scenario outline as explicit scenarios for each possibility? I am not sure because the status of a contract is restricted by four possible values as opposed to the examples on the internet.
One thing I find that helps is to remember that Gherkin is just a syntax for Specification by Example. You are trying to provide the examples that make most sense to you in the business domains language.
As such, what you are proposing is perfectly valid. You have one example of a scenario that uses tables to define what happens when a planned contract is edited, and another set of examples that produce errors when contracts in other states. You could also do it explicitly by expanding the outline for each state. Both are valid, and you can always refactor your feature sepcifications as you would the codebase.
What you are aiming to do here however is to provide a grammar, a framework, a language, call it what you will, that you can use to have conversations with your business analysts. You want to be able to pull out this document and say "This is how the system works now, how do we change this to make it support your new feature?".
Personally, I'm avoiding tabular and outline forms in my features right now as I want to make it look as friendly as possible to all I show it to, and as yet, my features are still easy to describe.