Please ignore this PR

[francoismassart]

PR created just to be able to run coveralls (doesn't run on my local)

I'm curious to see if we could still use utils.triggerEvent() instead of el.click()

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 98.272% when pulling 8f197f6 on francoismassart:utils-triggerevent into 3f2a313 on wxsms:master.

[francoismassart]

"Coverage remained the same" 🥇 , that means that utils.triggerEvent() can also work here, maybe we simply need the correct values for the bubbles and cancelable args.

@wxsms, do you think it is a good idea to find out the correct call using utils.triggerEvent() ?
This way, we could keep it consistent in all the spec files... WDYT ? Let me know and I'll find it out.

[wxsms]

Hi. Thanks for the discovery. It seems working correctly with args set.

Actually the triggerEvent method is used to by pass some limitations of phantomjs before (sometimes focus() or something else can't trigger directly as usual).

I don't think that it is very necessary in keeping the event trigger test code consistent. Since they are just testings, it doesn't matter how to write them as long as they work as expect.

[francoismassart]

Then we can ignore and close this one.

Did you see the other PR about the setSelection ?
#109