This week I wanted to create an user account with the NS (Nederlandse Spoorwegen, Dutch Railways) via their website. After entering the necessary details everything seemed to progress well until I received a so-called ‘confirmation-mail’ in which I had to click a link to finalize the process. This click directed me again to the website of the NS to fill out some additional information. However, I was confused they even needed more additional information and I closed the web window before filling it out. When clicking the link in the confirmation-mail again, I got an error message informing me that this was an invalid link. Multiple ‘re-clicks’ did not improve the situation and I realized I made a mistake in closing this web window. Frustrated as I was I decided to call the help desk, but after waiting for more than 15 minutes in the waiting queue I decided to search for an alternative flow, hoping I would find one.
As it is impossible to test every possible execution path through code, it is important to think about clever scenarios of testing. These scenarios need to be chosen to cover as much as possible to increase the chance of finding present defects as much as possible.
In defining these testcases, three possible kinds of scenarios can be considered:
- Happy Flows
- Alternative Flows
- Sad Flows
Test scenarios performing the intended usage of the software are called happy flows. Normally, these test scenarios would cover the majority of the software’s usage.
An alternative flow is a test scenario testing a flow other than the intended usage of the software that, however, will result in the completion of the scenario’s goal. By means of an alternative flow, an alternative execution path through the code is taken to achieve the goal.
Sad flows are test scenarios testing error situations in which the intended goal of the flow is not achieved. An example would be to provide invalid input to the software. A sad flow tests how the software reacts to error situations.
Still, when defining different flows for testing a user story, it seems to be most difficult to think about alternative flows. Which flow of steps or actions, which are not specified, will still deliver the desired result to the customer? This brings me back to my, so far, failed user account request with the NS.
Apparently I was in the situation in which the happy flow in requesting a user account with the NS was not working anymore as I got the error message of an invalid link. And of course logging in using my e-mail address as user name, which I already entered in the first step of the registration, was also not feasible. Simply because I did not yet set a password.
When realizing I did not yet set a password, I thought to try to use the always present ‘forgotten password’ link; a savior whenever you cannot continue to login. Surprisingly, clicking this ‘forgotten password’ link and entering my e-mail address resulted into receiving a new confirmation-mail with a link to click to finalize the user account creation process. And guess what….? Yes! This link worked and showed me the webpage in which the additional information for the user account was asked. After entering this additional information, including setting the password, my account was created….. I was relieved I had found an alternative flow to create my user account.
This alternative flow would look like:
- Request creation of an user account.
- Fill out needed information.
- Wait for confirmation mail.
- Click the link in the confirmation mail.
- Do not fill out additional information but immediately close the ‘confirmation web window’.
- Open login page.
- Request to reset the password via the ‘forgotten password’ link.
- Enter your e-mail address.
- Wait for confirmation mail.
- Click the link in the newly received confirmation mail.
- Fill out additional requested information including a password.
- Finalize the process.
I wonder whether the NS did consider this alternative flow in their testing…….