From 08c78c8b7ace590db65780fb826e2f36865d7fe3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Yanchao WANG Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 11:23:24 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] fix an error that may cause confusion --- at-a-glance.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/at-a-glance.rst b/at-a-glance.rst index c294c19..eeb5a8f 100644 --- a/at-a-glance.rst +++ b/at-a-glance.rst @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ there is actually 2 completely different types of browser emulators out there: * Headless browser emulators * Browser controllers -First type browsers are simple pure HTTP specification implementations, like +First type browser emulators are simple pure HTTP specification implementations, like `Goutte`_. Those browser emulators send a real HTTP requests against an application and parse the response content. They are very simple to run and configure, because this type of emulators can be written in any available programming From 86a21429c5621e10a31c17c99488f205c1968abb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Yanchao WANG Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 11:34:52 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] fix a similar confusion between browser and brower emulator --- at-a-glance.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/at-a-glance.rst b/at-a-glance.rst index eeb5a8f..538260f 100644 --- a/at-a-glance.rst +++ b/at-a-glance.rst @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ is that such browser emulators require the installed browser, extra configuratio and are usually much slower than headless counterparts. So, the easy answer is to choose the best emulator for your project and use -its API for testing. But as we've already seen, both browser types have both +its API for testing. But as we've already seen, both browser emulator types have both advantages and disadvantages. If you choose headless browser emulator, you will not be able to test your JS/AJAX pages. And if you choose browser controller, your overall test suite will become very slow at some point. So, in real