Best way to automate the same form across multiple locale profiles?

Browser Automation Feedback
1

I’m evaluating Hidemium for an authorized cross-browser and localization QA workflow.

The goal is to run the same public web application through several isolated browser profiles with different:

  • Languages

  • Time zones

  • Countries

  • Screen resolutions

  • Mobile and desktop user agents

  • Fresh and persistent storage states

This is the interactive page I’m currently using as the test case:

https://deckaura.com/pages/angel-number-calculator

The page has two separate user flows:

  1. Selecting a month, day, and year

  2. Entering a number directly

It then reveals a dynamic result without navigating to a new page.

Disclosure: I help maintain the linked website. I’m using it as an authorized test target and am not trying to bypass access controls or automate third-party accounts.

I’m trying to determine the cleanest way to organize this in Hidemium.

1. One profile per locale or dynamic profile creation?

Would you create permanent profiles for combinations such as:

  • English / United States / desktop

  • English / United Kingdom / desktop

  • Korean / South Korea / mobile

  • Indonesian / Indonesia / mobile

  • Turkish / Türkiye / desktop

Or is it better to generate temporary profiles through the API for every test run?

Permanent profiles would make failures easier to reproduce, but temporary profiles would provide a cleaner state.

2. Matching language, country, and time zone

Should these values always match each other?

For example, would a profile with:

  • Indonesian language

  • United States IP

  • Europe/Istanbul time zone

be useful as an inconsistency test, or would that create unrealistic results that are not worth including in a normal QA matrix?

3. Testing fresh and returning visitors

I need to test both:

  • A first visit with no cookies or local storage

  • A returning visit with the previous interface state preserved

Would you duplicate a clean base profile before each run, or clear cookies, cache, session storage, and local storage through an automation step?

I’m concerned that simply clearing cookies may leave some application state behind.

4. Reliable element selectors

For automation, would you recommend using:

  • Element IDs

  • data-testid attributes

  • Visible text

  • ARIA roles and accessible names

The interface contains repeated labels such as “Month,” “Day,” and “Year,” so text-only selectors could become fragile when the language changes.

5. Dynamic result detection

After submitting the form, the result is rendered dynamically.

What is the most reliable Hidemium automation pattern for waiting until:

  • The result container becomes visible

  • Its text is no longer empty

  • Animations have completed

  • The page has reached a stable state for screenshots

A fixed delay would be simple, but it would probably make the test slower and less reliable.

6. Screenshot comparison

Can Hidemium scripts produce screenshots with consistent viewport dimensions and device scale factors across profiles?

I would like to compare:

  • Form layout

  • Result-card layout

  • Text wrapping

  • Mobile overflow

  • Promotional content appearing below the result

The screenshots would be used for visual regression testing rather than scraping.

7. Reporting results

Is there a recommended way to export, for every profile:

  • Profile name

  • Locale

  • Viewport

  • Test input

  • Visible result

  • Pass/fail status

  • Screenshot path

  • Console errors

I could send these values to a webhook or n8n workflow, but I’m interested in whether Hidemium already provides a cleaner reporting pattern.

How would you structure this test matrix without creating an unmanageable number of profiles?