Content deleted Content added
→External links: Restore the Kohl article |
|||
Line 20:
To further explain, comparison can be made of freestyle exploratory testing to its antithesis [[test script|scripted testing]]. In the latter activity test cases are designed in advance. This includes both the individual steps and the expected results. These tests are later performed by a tester who compares the actual result with the expected. When performing exploratory testing, expectations are open. Some results may be predicted and expected; others may not. The tester configures, operates, observes, and evaluates the product and its behaviour, critically investigating the result, and reporting information that seems likely to be a bug (which threatens the value of the product to some person) or an issue (which threatens the quality of the testing effort).
In reality, testing almost always is a combination of exploratory and scripted testing, but with a tendency towards either one, depending on context.s
According to [[Cem Kaner]] & [[James Marcus Bach]], exploratory testing is more a [[mindset]] or "...a way of thinking about testing" than a methodology.<ref>Cem Kaner, James Bach, ''Exploratory & Risk Based Testing'', [http://www.testingeducation.org/a/nature.pdf www.testingeducation.org], 2004, p. 10</ref> They also say that it crosses a continuum from slightly exploratory (slightly ambiguous or vaguely scripted testing) to highly exploratory (freestyle exploratory testing).<ref>Cem Kaner, James Bach, ''Exploratory & Risk Based Testing'', [http://www.testingeducation.org/a/nature.pdf www.testingeducation.org], 2004, p. 14</ref>
| |||