Browserbite: cross‐browser testing via image processing

Cross‐browser compatibility testing is concerned with identifying perceptible differences in the way a Web page is rendered across different browsers or configurations thereof. Existing automated cross‐browser compatibility testing methods are generally based on document object model (DOM) analysis, or in some cases, a combination of DOM analysis with screenshot capture and image processing. DOM analysis, however, may miss incompatibilities that arise not during DOM construction but rather during rendering. Conversely, DOM analysis produces false alarms because different DOMs may lead to identical or sufficiently similar renderings. This paper presents a novel method for cross‐browser testing based purely on image processing. The method relies on image segmentation to extract ‘regions’ from a Web page and computer vision techniques to extract a set of characteristic features from each region. Regions extracted from a screenshot taken on a baseline browser are compared against regions extracted from the browser under test based on characteristic features. A machine learning classifier is used to determine if differences between two matched regions should be classified as an incompatibility. An evaluation involving 140 pages shows that the proposed method achieves an F‐score exceeding 90%, outperforming a state‐of‐the‐art cross‐browser testing tool based on DOM analysis. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  William G. J. Halfond,et al.  Finding HTML presentation failures using image comparison techniques , 2014, ASE.

[2]  Alessandro Orso,et al.  X-PERT: Accurate identification of cross-browser issues in web applications , 2013, 2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[3]  Alessandro Orso,et al.  WEBDIFF: Automated identification of cross-browser issues in web applications , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[4]  Wei-Ying Ma,et al.  VIPS: a Vision-based Page Segmentation Algorithm , 2003 .

[5]  Alessandro Orso,et al.  CrossCheck: Combining Crawling and Differencing to Better Detect Cross-browser Incompatibilities in Web Applications , 2012, 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation.

[6]  Nataliia Semenenko,et al.  Accurate diagnosis of cross-browser compatibility issues via machine learning , 2013 .

[7]  Martin Burger,et al.  WebMate: Generating Test Cases for Web 2.0 , 2013, SWQD.

[8]  Ming-Kuei Hu,et al.  Visual pattern recognition by moment invariants , 1962, IRE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[9]  Martin Burger,et al.  WebMate: Web Application Test Generation in the Real World , 2014, 2014 IEEE Seventh International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops.

[10]  Petra Perner,et al.  Data Mining - Concepts and Techniques , 2002, Künstliche Intell..

[11]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  Browserbite: Accurate Cross-Browser Testing via Machine Learning over Image Features , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[12]  Malay Kumar Kundu,et al.  A Simple Architecture for Computing Moments and Orientation of an Image , 2002, Fundam. Informaticae.

[13]  Valentin Dallmeier,et al.  WebMate: a tool for testing web 2.0 applications , 2012 .

[14]  Christopher G. Harris,et al.  A Combined Corner and Edge Detector , 1988, Alvey Vision Conference.

[15]  Ali Mesbah,et al.  Automated cross-browser compatibility testing , 2011, 2011 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[16]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  Cross-Browser Testing in Browserbite , 2014, ICWE.

[17]  Jan Flusser,et al.  On the independence of rotation moment invariants , 2000, Pattern Recognit..

[18]  Rastislav Lukac Perceptual Digital Imaging : Methods and Applications , 2012 .

[19]  Takeo Kanade,et al.  A multiple-baseline stereo , 1991, Proceedings. 1991 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.