kotovalexarian-likes-github/teamcapybara--capybara
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/teamcapybara/capybara.git synced 2022-11-09 12:08:07 -05:00
Code Releases Activity

Remove/update outdated README sections

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Jo Liss 2012-01-04 19:16:35 +01:00
parent 8c6ff16861
commit 7a856b702b
1 changed files with 4 additions and 12 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

16
README.md
View file

@ -376,10 +376,12 @@ page.has_no_selector?(:content)
page.has_xpath?('//table/tr')
page.has_css?('table tr.foo')
page.has_content?('foo')
page.has_text?('foo')
page.has_text?('foo') # synonymously: page.has_content?('foo')
```
**Note:** The negative forms like `has_no_selector?` are different from `not
has_selector?`. Read the section on asynchronous JavaScript for an explanation.
You can use these with RSpec's magic matchers:
```ruby
@ -390,18 +392,8 @@ page.should have_no_selector(:content)
page.should have_xpath('//table/tr')
page.should have_css('table tr.foo')
page.should have_text('foo')
page.should have_no_text('foo')
```
**Note** that there are 2 matchers for checking content/text. `page.has_text?('foo')`
will check only for text that is displayable, whereas `page.has_content?('foo')` will
check for the content within any nodes (including the head section and within script tags).
Most of the time you'll want the behaviour of `page.has_text?('foo')`, so go with that
unless you have a specific reason to use `page.has_content?('foo')` instead.
**Note**: `page.should have_no_xpath` is preferred over `page.should_not have_xpath`.
Read the section on asynchronous JavaScript for an explanation.
If all else fails, you can also use the
<tt>[page.html](http://rubydoc.info/github/jnicklas/capybara/master/Capybara/Session#html-instance_method)</tt>
method to test against the raw HTML: