So first there was Selenium's JSON Wire protocol, then came the W3C WebDriver spec and now we're back to browser-specific implementations? As someone who's tried/is trying to automate Firefox/Chrome/Safari/IE in a consistent fashion, my only question is: WHY?
Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
11–20 of 105 posts
Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#12> When you install Puppeteer, it downloads a recent version of Chromium (~71Mb Mac, ~90Mb Linux, ~110Mb Win) that is guaranteed to work with the API.
A lot of the chrome interface libs about at the moment require you to maintain your own instance of chrome/chromium and launch the headless server with your command line, or require a pre compiled version, that can quickly get out of date (https://github.com/adieuadieu/serverless-chrome/tree/master/...). Having this taken care of is a blessing.
Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#13Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#14So first there was Selenium's JSON Wire protocol, then came the W3C WebDriver spec and now we're back to browser-specific implementations? As someone who's tried/is trying to automate Firefox/Chrome/Safari/IE in a consistent fashion, my only question is: WHY?
Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#15Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#16So first there was Selenium's JSON Wire protocol, then came the W3C WebDriver spec and now we're back to browser-specific implementations? As someone who's tried/is trying to automate Firefox/Chrome/Safari/IE in a consistent fashion, my only question is: WHY?
Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#17So first there was Selenium's JSON Wire protocol, then came the W3C WebDriver spec and now we're back to browser-specific implementations? As someone who's tried/is trying to automate Firefox/Chrome/Safari/IE in a consistent fashion, my only question is: WHY?
Because WebDriver just doesn't do. For an example of an impossible task, try to retrieve request headers using Selenium. Browser automation getting more and more complicated the more cases you're trying to cover and in my impression WebDriver is definitely not enough. Who knows, perhaps some new version of WebDriver that I never heard of it will catch up once the functionality gets properly defined.
Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#18One of the biggest wins here is this little tidbit: > When you install Puppeteer, it downloads a recent version of Chromium (~71Mb Mac, ~90Mb Linux, ~110Mb Win) that is guaranteed to work with the API. A lot of the chrome interface libs about at the moment require you to maintain your own instance of chrome/chromium and launch the headless server with your command line, or require a pre compiled version, that can qui…
Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#19One of the biggest wins here is this little tidbit: > When you install Puppeteer, it downloads a recent version of Chromium (~71Mb Mac, ~90Mb Linux, ~110Mb Win) that is guaranteed to work with the API. A lot of the chrome interface libs about at the moment require you to maintain your own instance of chrome/chromium and launch the headless server with your command line, or require a pre compiled version, that can qui…
... nightmarejs did that for you, too.
Re: Puppeteer: Headless Chrome Node API
#20So first there was Selenium's JSON Wire protocol, then came the W3C WebDriver spec and now we're back to browser-specific implementations? As someone who's tried/is trying to automate Firefox/Chrome/Safari/IE in a consistent fashion, my only question is: WHY?
Chrome DevTools Protocol (CDP) is a more advanced API, and I've been leading an effort on getting multiple browsers to look at CDP under https://remotedebug.org