Automated Application Interface Traversing Method
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
The manual traversal of application interfaces is excessively complex and inefficient, often resulting in interface omissions due to the large number of language types and interfaces, leading to high workload and low efficiency.
Innovation Solution
An automated application interface traversing method and system that uses processing circuitry to select a target interface, determine if it has untraversed control elements, sub-interfaces, or parent interfaces, and update a control list to ensure all interfaces are traversed, utilizing a UiAutomator testing framework to generate coordinate information and identify traversed interfaces.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If manual interface traversing is performed, then users can view and test all application interfaces, but the workload is high and efficiency is low due to the large quantity of interfaces and language types
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces the manual mechanical operation of interface traversing with an automated testing system. The system automatically selects interfaces based on language types, navigates through sub-interfaces, and records traversal status without human intervention, thereby dramatically improving efficiency and reducing time consumption.
Solution Approach 2:
The testing system performs self-service by automatically managing the entire interface traversing process. It independently selects interfaces, navigates through them, detects traversal status, and generates test reports without requiring continuous human operation, making the system self-sufficient in performing the traversing task.
2Reliability
If manual interface traversing is performed, then users can test interface display correctness, but interface omission easily occurs due to the complex traversing process
Solution Approach 1:
The system implements feedback mechanisms by continuously detecting and recording the traversal status of each interface. It maintains a control list that tracks which interfaces have been tested and which have been omitted, providing real-time feedback on traversal completeness. This feedback loop ensures that no interface is missed and allows for corrective action if omissions are detected.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs preliminary actions by pre-defining the complete set of interfaces that need to be traversed based on language types and interface hierarchies. It prepares a comprehensive test plan before execution, identifying all potential interfaces and sub-interfaces that must be covered, thereby preventing omissions before they occur.
3Reliability
If all interfaces are manually traversed to ensure no omission, then completeness is improved, but the workload increases significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The system replaces manual mechanical operations with automated processes. It automatically navigates through all interfaces, detects their traversal status, and records results without human intervention. This substitution maintains complete coverage while eliminating the high workload associated with manual traversing of numerous interfaces across multiple language types.
4Measurement precision
If manual traversing is performed across multiple language types, then language-specific display correctness can be verified, but the quantity of interfaces to test increases dramatically
Solution Approach 1:
The testing system exhibits universality by being capable of handling multiple language types through a single automated framework. It automatically adapts to different language configurations, selects appropriate interfaces for each language, and performs traversing without requiring separate manual processes for each language, thereby managing the increased quantity of interfaces efficiently.
Solution Approach 2:
The system segments the large quantity of interfaces by organizing them according to language types and hierarchical relationships. It divides the traversing task into manageable units based on language-specific interface sets, allowing systematic processing of each segment while maintaining overall completeness across all languages.
Data Source
AI summary
An apparatus including processing circuitry and an application interface traversing method are described. The processing circuitry selects a target interface from a plurality of interfaces of an application to be tested. The target interface is associated with at least one of a control element, a sub-interface, and a parent interface. The processing circuitry obtains a first control list for the target interface. The first control list indicates whether the at least one of the control element, the sub-interface, and the parent interface has been traversed. The processing circuitry determines, based on the first control list, whether the target interface is associated with a non-traversed interface corresponding to one of the at least one of the control element, the sub-interface, and the parent interface. When the target interface is determined to be associated with the non-traversed interface, the processing circuitry selects the non-traversed interface to update the first control list.