Naming BDD: when does it cease to be a user?

Question

I am attracted to MSpec , hoping to one day share my test reports with non-developers * , but it is most valuable (right?) If I discuss business (user experience) in test / script names (instead of individual C # objects / members that are actually located under testing).

But I do my best to use non-developer issues in my test / script names with the help of low-level functionality. The further the problem with the user interface, the more complex the script’s name, so it a) relates to a non-developer, and b) describes the tested low-level functionality.

As you move further and further from the user interface, is there a point at which test / script names simply cannot be shared with non-developers? I feel that the answer should be no, because I should not test the behavior, unless it concerns a non-developer, but I am not regular enough to be sure what I am missing.

If there are any obvious answers, I would appreciate some quotes / links.

* for example. end users or other interested parties ("interested parties" may include future developers - or me in a year and a half - using these specifications to get an idea of ​​why the system is)

Answer 1

Usually we use the word “script” to describe fully functional custom POV scripts.

If you want the word to describe class-level behavior, try an “example”.

Your examples will be from the point of view of users of your class. If these custom classes want especially developer-oriented behavior, then yes, your examples will ultimately be focused on the developers in them.

Having said that, here are some vocabulary changes that I have found, let me tell you about the value that I am looking for most commercially, I can:

• returns → tells me or gives me
• calls → delegates, asks
• handles concurrency -> handles two things at once.
• extends → is
• implements → fulfills the role

Basically, if you use the word developer-jargon, imagine you explain it to someone with a few more words, and then use that.

I would not go overboard with this. The reason for using domain-specific terms in scenarios is because interested parties are interested in reading and (hopefully) writing them. The audience for the examples at the class level is technical, so it does not really matter if we have technical problems.