i need some help related to masked field in web form. Syntax of phone field is (___)___-_____, if i execute this code in ruby shell
browser.text_field(:id => 'txtphone').set '7893457889'
... nothing has been added in the phone field.
then i find this solution in one blog, someone said first unmask this field using this code.
browser.text_field(:id,'txtphone').fire_event("unmask")
then write the above code again.
browser.text_field(:id => 'txtphone').set '7893457889'
but still nothing has happened. kindly help me out...am i doing right or still there is a mistake.
If you could provide some sample of the page HTML it will be easier to give you an answer more likely to work.
Given what you have provided us to work from, we have to go with the normal way that such masked input fields typically work and go from there. Usually pages with this kind of thing are calling a javascript function which is triggered by a specific event. Most often this is an event such as onchange but it may be something like keypress or any other even that happens when a normal user types or pasts text into the cell.
You likely need to experiment with using the '.fire_event' method to fire the proper javascript event, or if that fails entirely making a direct call to execute the proper script
When doing this do not confuse the name of a script such as 'applymask' or somesuch with the javascript event which causes that script to be invoked.
The answers to this question How to find out which JavaScript events fired? include some good information on how to use firebug or the chrome developer tools to figure out what events are being fired when you interact with an object on the browser screen.
Update: instead of responding here to indicate if this answer was of any use the OP reposted their question here Masked Text Box issue and by digging around on the vendor's demo site (since that time he actually had posted some of the HTML when we asked for it) I was able to find a solution using watir-webdriver that worked for him.
Related
I have a ribbon button on the case entity that updates a single two-option field on the form via javascript. When this is used on a case that has been resolved/closed it returns an error as the form is now read only.
Is there a way in javascript that I could get it to re-activate the form, change the field and then put it back to the way it was before? I have tried to force the change on the form but even if i manage to make it appear that you can save it, it will return the error as the form record is still counted as de-activated, even though you can change the fields
Thanks
You should be able to use a SOAP call for this, its a little involved, I would suggest starting here. You have to generate XML that represents the request, the link provides some tools to do this.
I believe you will need to issue JavaScript versions of SetStateRequest (to open) and CloseIncidentRequest (to close).
On the other hand, which is a different approach entirely, is to disable the button when the record is deactivated, then users have to manually renable the record make the change and close again. This is closer to 'working with the system' which I have touched upon here, its a different situation but the principle still applies.
I want to add text to body element but I don't know how. Which method will work on the body tag?
Sorry for my english and thanks for replies.
In Watir, you can manipulate a web page (DOM) using JS, just like that:
browser.execute_script("document.getElementById('pageContent').appendChild(document.createTextNode('Great Success!'));")
I assume that the point of the question is:
All users are not just interacting by just clicking buttons and links on the web app, some of them are doing nasty things like altering http requests to make your system do something that it is not supposed to do... or to just have some fun.
To mimic this behavior, you could write a ui-test that alters forms on the web page, so that for example, one could type in anything into any field instead of a limited dropdown.
To do that, ui test has to:
manipulate DOM to set form inputs free of limitations (replace select's with input's, etc.)
ui test has to know, which values to use, in many cases it's pointless to enter random values. Your webapp has to provide some good "unwanted" options.
Why would you want to modify the webpage in Watir? It's for automated testing, not DOM manipulation.
If you want to add something to the DOM element in javascript, you can do it like that:
var txt = document.createTextNode(" This text was added to the DIV.");
document.getElementById('myDiv').appendChild(txt);
Or use some DOM manipulation library, like jQuery.
If you have not worked your way though the watir tutorial, I would suggest you do so. It deals with things like filling in text fields etc.
Learn to use the developer tools for your browser, Firebug for Firefox, or the built in tools for IE and CHrome. They will let you look at things as you interact with the site.
If the element is not a normal HTML input field of some sort, then you are dealing with a custom control. Many exist and they are varied and there is no one set solution for dealing with them. Without knowing which control you are using, and being able ourselves to interact with a sample of it, or at least see the HTML, it is very very difficult to advise you, we basically have to just guess (which is often a waste of everyone's time)
Odds are if you have a place you can enter text, then it is some form of input control, it might not start out that way, you may need to click on some other element, to make the input area appear, but without a sample of HTML all we can do is guess.
If this is a commercial control, see if you can find a demo site that shows the control in action. Try googling things like class names for the elements and often you get lucky
i m using the rad masked control for phone field.
telerik:RadMaskedTextBox ID="txtPhone1" runat="server" EnableAjaxSkinRendering="False" Mask="(###) ###-####" Skin="Hay" ZeroPadNumericRanges="False" MaxLength="20" TabIndex="30" Width="200px"></telerik:RadMaskedTextBox
when i m trying to add phone using watir, using this code
browser.text_field(:id => 'ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_Registration2_txtPhone1_text').set '7893457889'
only last value has been added. kindly help me out. how to fill masked value.
Using Watir-webdriver and the example from Teleriks demo site, and IE browser, I was able to set the value with
browser.text_field(:id,"RadMaskedTextBox1_text").set '1234567890'
This seemed to work just as expected, added the formatting, and seemed functional to me.
With Watir I was able to set it via using
browser.text_field(:id, 'RadMaskedTextBox1_text').value='1234567890'
However although the value showed up in the field, it was not formatted and I was never able to get it to actually validate that input. I tried firing various events such as onchange, to get the client side code to process it, but no joy. If I was using this tool I might consider calling the vendor or getting on their site and asking them for assistance at this point. (provided you need to use Watir)
If watir-webdriver is not a viable option for you (I like it for cross browser testing) then perhaps someone else can spend the time to dig a bit deeper. (I'm personally past the point where digging into this control to extend my own knowledge is worth my employers time...)
Possibly there might be some way around this with Rautomation, but I'm new enough with it where I don't immediately see an easy solution there.
OMG. This is so old. But I am going to add to it. When dealing with masked elements, I am successful using the following sendkeys technique instead of injecting the value into the inner element text. Send Ctrl-A to highlight everything, then start typing, then tab out of control.
e = #browser.text_field(id: OrderEntryPOM.stop_window_start_date)
e.send_keys [:control, 'a'], start_date, :tab
Is there any sort of documentation on exactly what parameters you can put in the url of Google viewer?
Originally, I thought it was just url,embedded,chrome, but I've recently come accross other funny ones like a,pagenumber, and a few others for authentication etc.
Any clues?
One I know is "chrome"
If you've got https://docs.google.com/viewer?........;chrome=true
then you see a fairly heavy UI version of that doc, however with "chrome=false" you get a compact version.
But indeed, I'd like a complete list myself!
I know this question is very old and perhaps you already solved your issue, but for anyone on the internet who might be looking for an answer...
I have been looking for this recently, following a guide I found on GitHub Gist
https://gist.github.com/tzmartin/1cf85dc3d975f94cfddc04bc0dd399be
More specifically, the option to embed a certain page of pdf using
<iframe src="https://docs.google.com/viewer?srcid=[put your file id here]&pid=explorer&efh=false&a=v&chrome=false&embedded=true" width="580px" height="480px"></iframe>
The best I could fing was this article (I suppose from a long time now)
https://weekly-geekly.github.io/articles/111647/index.html
HOWEVER, I tried modifying the attributes and the result was simply a redirect to
https://drive.google.com/file/d/[ID]/edit
https://drive.google.com/file/d/[ID]/preview or
https://drive.google.com/file/d/[ID]/view
AS OF MAY 2020, THIS SOLUTION PROBABLY DOESN'T WORK
I'm also on a quest to discover some of the parameters of the viewer.
the "chrome" parameter doesn't seem to do anything, though. Is this
supposed to be the same as embedded=true?
Parameters I know of:
url= (obviously)
embedded= (obviously)
hl= set language of UI (tooltips)
#:0.page.1 = jump to page 2 (page 1 is numbered 0) - this is unreliable and often requires a refresh after the first load,
defeating the purpose.
That said, when I use the Google Docs viewer on my site, "fit page to
screen" is the default view without any parameters. So maybe I'm
misunderstanding your question.
Source: For convenience, this is a full quote of the sole answer (it is from user k3david) to the crosspost of this question #Doc has posted to the Google support forum in 2011.
You can pass q=whatever to pass a search query to the viewer.
How can we restrict a user from saving the page?
Please provide some tips to disable File->Save and View Source options
EDIT: Obviously it can't be done, and probably shouldn't be attempted. But possibly a more interesting variant on this question is how can we make is sufficiently hard for a user to save a page in a usable format such that it is not worth their while doing so? The question doesn't pose a value, but say we were protecting an article subscription site where the user is paying a few hundred dollars per annum for continued access to text.
Since the page has been sent to the client, there will always be a way to get that information. Trying to stop a user from doing this will only frustrate them.
The only way to have a user not be able to save a file is to not send it to them.
While the best answer is "Don't do this," there are ways to make it more difficult for them. And since the point of this site is actually answer the question even if it's bad, here is the best way:
First you'll need to have the page open in a new window where you turn off the address bar and toolbar and everything else. That will make it so the user can't easily get to the File menu at all. To do this you'll need a "splash" page that the user loads to and then when they click a link, it opens the popup that serves the main content of your page. Details on how to create popups without things like the toolbar are here:
http://blazonry.com/javascript/windows.php
Then you'll want to add some javascript to each page that prevents the user from right clicking. Here is one method:
http://javascript.about.com/library/blnoright.htm
Finally, if it's your Javascript code that you don't want to be seen, then obfuscating your code is a pretty effective way to do that. They can still see the code if they have much know-how, but the obfuscated code would be a gigantic pain to actually interpret. There are lots of obfuscators out there; here is a free web-based one:
http://www.javascriptobfuscator.com/
This is far from foolproof. It will stop all "casual" users, but any power user will probably be able to easily figure out a way around it. Still if the idea is to at least prevent a good majority of it then this should suffice.
Update for updated question:
To address your new expanded question, I would say the best way to accomplish what you're saying is to use a format that supports DRM. Adobe Acrobat would probably be the best choice because almost everyone has the reader installed. You can prevent PDF files from being saved to the computer so that they can only be loaded from the webpage by a logged in user. The user could still do a screen capture of the document itself which I don't believe is preventable (unless Adobe Reader has some security in place for this, which they might) but it should be sufficient security for most uses.
Don't do it.
Seriously, if the user can see the page in their browser they can see the source code and/or save it to their computer.
You are fighting a losing battle here.
What about the browser's cache? It can be saved from there.
What about a print screen? That could also save the page.
The only way to prevent a user from saving something is to not show it to them in the first place.
It's really a waste of time and resources to try and do this in html as any method you use can be trivially circumvented.
Instead I would use some other technology to display the data - you can never get around a screen capture. but if you're for instance displaying text and you want to make it hard for the use to save that text for use elsewhere then possible options include
PDF - which can disable save and print. There are extensions to most popular web languages that will write a pdf on the fly. Indeed you might be as well just to go down the DRM route with Adobe and embed a document
Flash - most probably via Flex which could be used to write a general-purpose app to display text and images. The advantage of Flash is that it's easier to set up links than pdf.
Or something else, a custom java applet, or even a vrml plugin and display the text in 3D!
In all cases you could display text against a disruptive background to make OCR more difficult, and images could be watermarked. However nothing is going to stop a determined and resourceful viewer, although you can possibly make it sufficiently hard that it's not worth their time.
The least you can do is... the content is generated dynamically by Javascript. In that way, they cannot simply save it. Of course, in FX, they can still view the generated code and then copy&paste. however, normally people cannot save the page.
It shouldn't be an issue, but if you really don't want a user from seeing your code (javascript, css or html) for some reason, than you could use some obfuscation tool which makes the code less readable.
Try javascript "encoding" and obfuscation.
Something like
if(document.location == 'mydomain.com') {
content = getAjax('mycontent.xml');
// content will hold something like 72, 94, 81, 99, ... - encoded ASCII codes
document.write(String.fromCharCode(content));
}
It will always be possible to save the page, but for non-technical guys it will be harder to make it work.
There are 2 protections
domain name
converting ASCII
It's only pseudocode, but I think you get the idea.
add these to code sets in script tag
document.addEventListener('contextmenu', function (e) {
e.preventDefault();
});
document.onkeydown = function (e) {
return false;
};
I'd like to add one more method which, imho, is hard to circumvent: Ctrl+S! (for me, Apple+S)
how can we make is sufficiently hard for a user to save a page in a usable format such that it is not worth their while doing so
Nothing hard: add on every page: "Personal property of John Stealer, company Zetabeta, paid with credit card 756890987654, billing address ..., subscription expires 12/20".
This is an "extended text format" that I just invented... it has an amazing property: though it looks like a regular text, user is much less willing to print it out and give to others...