-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 153
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
consider renaming have.js_property to have.property #538
Comments
So, now the main question is: Is .get_property implemented in Appium, does it differ from .get_attribute in Appium, if yes – how? And how does it differ from raw selenium implementation of get_property/get_attribute |
Here's what I've managed to pull from AI-chats. Would be nice to double check the examples in real test runs: Android
Ex:
iOS
Ex:
Difference from 'raw' Selenium Implementation
Ex:
So: |
…perty and have.property_ ... and match.native_property since have.* is more high level than match.* or query.*, I decided to keep have.property_ name more concise and less techy...
will this even work for mobile? o_O
if .get_property is valid for mobile
then we should rename it for sure here...
in the past we named is as have.js_property, because for web it was relevant only because of "javascript context", so we named it with "js_" prefix to emphasize that... But if it has a different from js-based implementation in Appium, and this method is still relevant for mobile context - then we have to rename it from js_property simply to property
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: