Logo PTI Logo FedCSIS

Position Papers of the 19th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems

Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 40

Analysis of end-to-end test automation tools based on the examples of Selenium WebDriver and Playwright

,

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2024F3747

Citation: Position Papers of the 19th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems, M. Bolanowski, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki, D. Ślęzak (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 40, pages 1–8 ()

Full text

Abstract. In the digital era, ensuring software reliability and effectiveness is crucial for business operations and daily life. This article analyzes and compares two prominent end-to-end test automation tools, Selenium WebDriver and Playwright. By examining their architecture, functionality, and browser interaction, the study provides practical guidance on tool selection. It includes theoretical foundations of testing, the importance of manual testing, and a detailed analysis of both tools. The findings suggest that Playwright generally offers faster test execution, particularly in headless mode, and simpler configuration. In contrast, Selenium benefits from a mature community and extensive documentation. The choice of tool should be based on project-specific needs, with Playwright favored for speed and simplicity, and Selenium for community support and integration capabilities.

References

  1. A. Holmes, M. Kellogg, Automating functional tests using Selenium, 2006, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/AGILE.2006.19
  2. E. Pelivani and B, Cico A comparative study of automation testing tools for web applications, 2021 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MECO52532.2021.9460242.
  3. M. A. Umar, Z. Chen, A study of automated software testing: Automation tools and frameworks, International Journal of Computer Science Engineering 2019, http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3924795.
  4. M. Psujek, A. Radzik, G. Kozieł, Comparative analysis of solutions used in automated testing of Internet applications, Department of Computer Science, Lublin University of Technology, Lublin, Poland, 2021, http://dx.doi.org/10.35784/jcsi.2373.
  5. P. Ramya, V. Sindhura, P. V. Sagar, Testing using selenium web driver, 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICECCT.2017.8117878.
  6. R. Dahiya, A. Shahid, Importance of manual and automation testing Department of Information Technology, AGI Institute, Auckland, New Zealand, 2019, http://dx.doi.org/10.5121/csit.2019.91719.
  7. R. K. Lenka, U. Satapathy, M. Dey, Comparative Analysis on Automated Testing of Web-based Application, Department of CSE, 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICACCCN.2018.8748374.
  8. S. K. Alferidah, S. Ahmed Automated Software Testing Tools, International Conference on Computing and Information Technology, ICCIT 2020, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICCIT-144147971.2020.9213735.
  9. https://github.com/microsoft/playwright/graphs/commit-activity (06.01.2024).
  10. https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/selenium/graphs/commit-activity (06.01.2024).
  11. https://maven.apache.org/
  12. https://playwright.dev/docs/intro
  13. https://testng.org/
  14. https://www.selenium.dev/documentation/
  15. https://www.udemy.com/courses/search/?src=ukw&q=Playwright (06.01.2024).
  16. https://www.udemy.com/courses/search/?src=ukw&q=Selenium (06.01.2024).
  17. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/selenium- webdriver?tab=Newest (10.07.2024).
  18. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/playwright (10.07.2024).