I have an idea for my testing team to implement a utility that will allow cross-application testing simultaneously. I have a general outline of the idea and have tried to discuss it elsewhere but, knowing those places, there will likely be very little feedback.

My question is, how should I go about doing this? Would this be suitable for here?

For more information, my post is here regarding the idea and what I am currently thinking. I would like to get feedback on it prior to starting the development process and starting the ball. If someone has done something similar, how they did it and implemented it etc etc.

Any advice for whether something like this would be applicable here (I feel it would be more of a discussion than a singular question so I am unsure).

As a note: I am not asking for ideas on the project currently. I am asking ideas for how to ask for ideas on the project. I want to build a high quality question regarding this or leave it alone completely.

1 Answer 1


Paul - I read through your idea on the SmartBear site and here are some thoughts:

  • You appear to be asking for input on the idea but you don't specify exactly what you are expecting (technical feasibility estimates?, poll on whether the user would buy/use such a tool?, ...)

  • Having tested both interfaces in a Java enterprise application a few years back, I am not sure that the domains (functional GUI interface and API testing) can be effectively combined. My biggest concern would be whether I can trust the results. Specifically, would the same data and scenarios useful for testing a user interface be effective in identifying defects in the API? If you are not talking about a duplication of the inputs on both interfaces, then what is the point of combining them?

  • I would think that the reason for combining the testing would involve scenarios that require both interface inputs simultaneously, such as load testing. In that case, it would be important to be able to correlate the timing and operation sequence in some form of log to be able to reproduce or identify conditions that produced failures. If that is the case, can the tool be easily integrated into popular performance tools on the market?

This isn't meant to discourage you, but to hopefully focus your effort. Good luck!

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .