<?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: Dev vs. Dev: Arguments For and Against Unobtrusive Javascript (UJS) [updated]</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stringfoo.com/2008/03/07/dev-vs-dev-arguments-for-and-against-unobtrusive-javascript-ujs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stringfoo.com/2008/03/07/dev-vs-dev-arguments-for-and-against-unobtrusive-javascript-ujs/</link>
	<description>Tips, Tools, Tutorials and Resources for Advanced Web Development</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:43:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jason</title>
		<link>http://stringfoo.com/2008/03/07/dev-vs-dev-arguments-for-and-against-unobtrusive-javascript-ujs/comment-page-1/#comment-232</link>
		<dc:creator>jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 02:31:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stringfoo.com/2008/03/04/dev-vs-dev-arguments-for-and-against-unobtrusive-javascript-ujs/#comment-232</guid>
		<description>This is a great article.  I think there&#039;s a point that was only sort of hinted at, though, and that is that the user experience needs to function with and without Javascript enabled.  Unless you&#039;re developing an actual RIA then the site should function both ways and use javascript to programatically enhance and replace page elements.

I also disagree with your stance on small shop development.  I agree that it&#039;s great and time saving to do some one-off inline functions.  However, in your example of having a small development team, what happens to the next team that inherits the code?  They&#039;ll get an inconsistent experience where it appears that most of the app is written with external javascript while having to really hunt around for that last bit of code.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a great article.  I think there&#8217;s a point that was only sort of hinted at, though, and that is that the user experience needs to function with and without Javascript enabled.  Unless you&#8217;re developing an actual RIA then the site should function both ways and use javascript to programatically enhance and replace page elements.</p>
<p>I also disagree with your stance on small shop development.  I agree that it&#8217;s great and time saving to do some one-off inline functions.  However, in your example of having a small development team, what happens to the next team that inherits the code?  They&#8217;ll get an inconsistent experience where it appears that most of the app is written with external javascript while having to really hunt around for that last bit of code.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
