Use Cases Are User Stories With Acceptance Tests

UserStories + AcceptanceTests are basically the same thing as a UseCase.

How do extensions and variations fit in? They are either additional AcceptanceTests or additional stories. Does it really matter as long as we know the system handles it?

UserStories + AcceptanceTests can be looked at as executable UseCases. Sounds like something good to have your case tool do. The AcceptanceTests bring UserStories to the engineering level.

Another realization I had is that if you do UseCases and automated AcceptanceTests you are essentially doubling your work. There is duplication between the UseCases and the AcceptanceTests. I think there is a good case to be made that UserStories + AcceptanceTests are more efficient way to work when compared to UseCases + AcceptanceTests.

You could try to prove this to yourself. Go ahead and use UseCases, but automate your AcceptanceTests. The automation must be done to a level that your customer can understand the AcceptanceTests. You might see the duplication that I saw.

--JamesGrenning on the XpMailingList

How do you run a Use Case? A use case is a picture not a test. <-- UseCase is not a picture. UseCase is a text.

Could UseCases incorporate tables to be fed to a runner for the FrameworkForIntegratedTest?

EditText of this page (last edited November 10, 2014) or FindPage with title or text search