<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Making Usable Frameworks and SDKs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.johnryding.com/making-usable-frameworks-and-sdks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.johnryding.com/making-usable-frameworks-and-sdks/</link>
	<description>What shall we do today...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2010 17:57:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Javier Figueroa</title>
		<link>http://www.johnryding.com/making-usable-frameworks-and-sdks/comment-page-1/#comment-175</link>
		<dc:creator>Javier Figueroa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:31:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnryding.com/making-usable-frameworks-and-sdks/#comment-175</guid>
		<description>John,

I like your rant about simple APIs I see your point and agree that simplicity is great. However I think you have to state a better distinction between a user interface and an API. Additionally, I think you are comparing apples with oranges when mentioning Twitter and  flicker, etc. because, I&#039;m sure you know, functionality wise they are completely different making these sites way more robust than Twitter.

Regarding the jQuery and dojo argument, I still think that as a professional developer, dojo gives me more flexibility. In your example dojo allows me to connect actions to whatever (like prototypes or even generated code) while jquery restricts me in that sense. I&#039;m not a fan of either though.

I like simple but I prefer clean code instead. 

Isn&#039;t ice berg a one word -&gt; iceberg ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John,</p>
<p>I like your rant about simple APIs I see your point and agree that simplicity is great. However I think you have to state a better distinction between a user interface and an API. Additionally, I think you are comparing apples with oranges when mentioning Twitter and  flicker, etc. because, I&#8217;m sure you know, functionality wise they are completely different making these sites way more robust than Twitter.</p>
<p>Regarding the jQuery and dojo argument, I still think that as a professional developer, dojo gives me more flexibility. In your example dojo allows me to connect actions to whatever (like prototypes or even generated code) while jquery restricts me in that sense. I&#8217;m not a fan of either though.</p>
<p>I like simple but I prefer clean code instead. </p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t ice berg a one word -&gt; iceberg ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
