<?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 for Outformations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outformations.com/blog/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog</link>
	<description>Step Beyond Information</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 18:54:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Mapping to the past considered helpful&#8230; by mysequwyqeqy</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=775&#038;cpage=1#comment-2271</link>
		<dc:creator>mysequwyqeqy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 07:03:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=775#comment-2271</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;mysequwyqeqy...&lt;/strong&gt;

 &lt;a href="http://mp3my.biz/performer/albums/tha-mobb-family/72693/1/" rel="nofollow"&gt;Download mp3 with Tha Mobb Family&lt;/a&gt; ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>mysequwyqeqy&#8230;</strong></p>
<p> <a href="http://mp3my.biz/performer/albums/tha-mobb-family/72693/1/" rel="nofollow">Download mp3 with Tha Mobb Family</a> &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Every Project Needs a Project Logbook by Joe Astolfi</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=637&#038;cpage=1#comment-1290</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Astolfi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 03:13:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=637#comment-1290</guid>
		<description>Hi Scott,
Your article caught my attention.  I am very interested in learning more about using a Project Logbook and how it differs from a Project Workbook.  Can you send me an example of each (that doesn't violate any company information rules of course!).
Thanks,
Joe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Scott,<br />
Your article caught my attention.  I am very interested in learning more about using a Project Logbook and how it differs from a Project Workbook.  Can you send me an example of each (that doesn&#8217;t violate any company information rules of course!).<br />
Thanks,<br />
Joe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Every Project Needs a Project Logbook by L A Sutton</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=637&#038;cpage=1#comment-1278</link>
		<dc:creator>L A Sutton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 01:50:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=637#comment-1278</guid>
		<description>I want a sample of the logbook.  Is it an excel spreadsheet?  A blog format?  Give us a template.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I want a sample of the logbook.  Is it an excel spreadsheet?  A blog format?  Give us a template.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hmmm, that smells nice - not a hint of a conditional in the air&#8230; by Scott Hurlbert</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=405&#038;cpage=1#comment-437</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Hurlbert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:26:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=405#comment-437</guid>
		<description>Thanks Jeff, fantastic references.  I've tried on several occasions to explain why a one line loop with an extension method is "better" than a foreach loop (in some cases).  The code you reference demonstrates this very well, particularly Matt's example of using the Aggregate() extension.   Using these methods definitely reduces the cyclomatic complexity of the client methods and that's what you're after.  Also, this style of coding only works if you've learned to depend upon interfaces - another leading practice.  Great stuff, thanks for sharing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Jeff, fantastic references.  I&#8217;ve tried on several occasions to explain why a one line loop with an extension method is &#8220;better&#8221; than a foreach loop (in some cases).  The code you reference demonstrates this very well, particularly Matt&#8217;s example of using the Aggregate() extension.   Using these methods definitely reduces the cyclomatic complexity of the client methods and that&#8217;s what you&#8217;re after.  Also, this style of coding only works if you&#8217;ve learned to depend upon interfaces - another leading practice.  Great stuff, thanks for sharing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hmmm, that smells nice - not a hint of a conditional in the air&#8230; by Jeff Doolittle</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=405&#038;cpage=1#comment-435</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Doolittle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:45:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=405#comment-435</guid>
		<description>Aggregated specifications are another great way to resolve issues of cyclomatic complexity, improving testability and developer comprehension of the code.

Check out Matt Hinze's great article on this topic: http://mhinze.com/aggregated-specifications/

Notice how each individual specification object determines its applicability with the "ShouldApply" method?  In the old days, I remember writing very long methods for building up queries.  These long methods would perform multiple branches and check various conditions to determine which query clauses should apply.  This approach was very error prone, difficult to test, difficult to maintain, difficult to extend, etc.

With aggregated specifications, you can focus on the specifics of one query clause at a time.  You can extend the querying options by created new classes rather than modifying existing code, making your code much more SOLID (especially SRP and OCP).

This is just one example of a practical way you can break out of the nightmare of multiple branches and long conditional statements.  

For more ways to handle the code smell of "Conditional Complexity," along with other code smells, I highly recommend "Refactoring to Patterns" by Joshua Kerievsky.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aggregated specifications are another great way to resolve issues of cyclomatic complexity, improving testability and developer comprehension of the code.</p>
<p>Check out Matt Hinze&#8217;s great article on this topic: <a href="http://mhinze.com/aggregated-specifications/" rel="nofollow">http://mhinze.com/aggregated-specifications/</a></p>
<p>Notice how each individual specification object determines its applicability with the &#8220;ShouldApply&#8221; method?  In the old days, I remember writing very long methods for building up queries.  These long methods would perform multiple branches and check various conditions to determine which query clauses should apply.  This approach was very error prone, difficult to test, difficult to maintain, difficult to extend, etc.</p>
<p>With aggregated specifications, you can focus on the specifics of one query clause at a time.  You can extend the querying options by created new classes rather than modifying existing code, making your code much more SOLID (especially SRP and OCP).</p>
<p>This is just one example of a practical way you can break out of the nightmare of multiple branches and long conditional statements.  </p>
<p>For more ways to handle the code smell of &#8220;Conditional Complexity,&#8221; along with other code smells, I highly recommend &#8220;Refactoring to Patterns&#8221; by Joshua Kerievsky.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why should developers learn Blend? by Mark Ginnebaugh</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=198&#038;cpage=1#comment-61</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Ginnebaugh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:31:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=198#comment-61</guid>
		<description>At DesignMind we have been evaluating Expression Studio 3, which we received in a recent shipment to Microsoft Gold Certified Partners.  We also evaluated a variety of prototyping tools (see my blog entry on Balsamiq at http://markginnebaugh.com/blog/?p=1200).

Expression Blend 3 includes SketchFlow, which is a very powerful prototyping tool that we can integrate into our development process.  I still like Balsamiq for situations where we are working with clients on something rough and informal.  However, for prototypes that need to look like real systems, SketchFlow is awesome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At DesignMind we have been evaluating Expression Studio 3, which we received in a recent shipment to Microsoft Gold Certified Partners.  We also evaluated a variety of prototyping tools (see my blog entry on Balsamiq at <a href="http://markginnebaugh.com/blog/?p=1200" rel="nofollow">http://markginnebaugh.com/blog/?p=1200</a>).</p>
<p>Expression Blend 3 includes SketchFlow, which is a very powerful prototyping tool that we can integrate into our development process.  I still like Balsamiq for situations where we are working with clients on something rough and informal.  However, for prototypes that need to look like real systems, SketchFlow is awesome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Working on enumerating my personal values&#8230; by Alistair</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=51&#038;cpage=1#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>Alistair</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:12:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=51#comment-22</guid>
		<description>How about "soft truth, spoken gently but to be heard."

That's just what I'm feeling at the moment. Don't think I'm up for hard truth just at this time, either on the speaking or hearing part. 

Thanks..... Alistair</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about &#8220;soft truth, spoken gently but to be heard.&#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s just what I&#8217;m feeling at the moment. Don&#8217;t think I&#8217;m up for hard truth just at this time, either on the speaking or hearing part. </p>
<p>Thanks&#8230;.. Alistair</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What is the current version of SQL Server Compact Edition? by Scott Hurlbert</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=93&#038;cpage=1#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Hurlbert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:07:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=93#comment-21</guid>
		<description>Don, 

I think it would be helpful if you augmented this with information with an explaination of how to find out what version you currently have installed.   

For example, I am trying to run some sample code which tells me I need SQL v655 and that my installed version is SQL v612.  I installed the SQL CE 3.5 SP1 and still got the same message.

I found this post helpful: http://conceptdev.blogspot.com/2009/04/mdf-cannot-be-opened-because-it-is.html

In the end, I found that the original MDF file was from SQL Server 2008 and I'm running 2005.   I found a script to recreate the MDF file on my 2005 server but it was all very confusing because the error messages were written by idiots.  It always amazes me to think that when reporting errors developers give the literal explanation of the error at times when they've got the exact cause in hand.  Tell me BOTH!  

Thanks, Scott</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don, </p>
<p>I think it would be helpful if you augmented this with information with an explaination of how to find out what version you currently have installed.   </p>
<p>For example, I am trying to run some sample code which tells me I need SQL v655 and that my installed version is SQL v612.  I installed the SQL CE 3.5 SP1 and still got the same message.</p>
<p>I found this post helpful: <a href="http://conceptdev.blogspot.com/2009/04/mdf-cannot-be-opened-because-it-is.html" rel="nofollow">http://conceptdev.blogspot.com/2009/04/mdf-cannot-be-opened-because-it-is.html</a></p>
<p>In the end, I found that the original MDF file was from SQL Server 2008 and I&#8217;m running 2005.   I found a script to recreate the MDF file on my 2005 server but it was all very confusing because the error messages were written by idiots.  It always amazes me to think that when reporting errors developers give the literal explanation of the error at times when they&#8217;ve got the exact cause in hand.  Tell me BOTH!  </p>
<p>Thanks, Scott</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on WPF in Line of Business, Why and where (by Jaime Rodriguez)&#8230;Are we learning anything? by Scott Hurlbert</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=136&#038;cpage=1#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Hurlbert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=136#comment-16</guid>
		<description>I had another thought about how to share as a team.  If we were to set up a context tag which identified a message as important to the team IQ, we could also set up an email address which could be carbonned on important messages.  Then the messages meant to build the team IQ could be auto-posted to a blog or log book.  This would have two effects, first it would make the posts visible and second it would document the posts in a way that could be searched so that developers wouldn't be depending only on their email system for archiving.   I know that after I've cleaned up my inbox and filed things away it becomes much harder to find technical emails, however I'm pretty good at being able to guess when I last saw them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had another thought about how to share as a team.  If we were to set up a context tag which identified a message as important to the team IQ, we could also set up an email address which could be carbonned on important messages.  Then the messages meant to build the team IQ could be auto-posted to a blog or log book.  This would have two effects, first it would make the posts visible and second it would document the posts in a way that could be searched so that developers wouldn&#8217;t be depending only on their email system for archiving.   I know that after I&#8217;ve cleaned up my inbox and filed things away it becomes much harder to find technical emails, however I&#8217;m pretty good at being able to guess when I last saw them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sketchflow Seems to be Microsoft&#8217;s Answer to Balsamiq by Don Robins</title>
		<link>http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=70&#038;cpage=1#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Robins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2009 06:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outformations.com/blog/?p=70#comment-15</guid>
		<description>I'm trying to wrap my head around SketchFlow, and in particular whether it truly has capability to evolve mockup into functional prototype.  Here is a collection of very interesting and informative &lt;a href='http://electricbeach.org/?tag=sketchflow' target='_none' rel="nofollow"&gt;BLOGs&lt;/a&gt; from Christian Schormann.

Keep in mind that it is integrated into &lt;a href="http://www.microsoft.com/expression/" rel="nofollow"&gt;Expression Blend&lt;/a&gt; and does not stand alone like Balsamiq: 

&lt;a href="http://www.balsamiq.com/products/mockups" rel="nofollow"&gt;Balsamiq&lt;/a&gt; is very lightweight, provides pre-drawn widgets to work with and is strictly a visual mockup that can't evolve into a working prototype.   It does however allow a full screen mode and dynamic linking across mockup files, but that's about it.

&lt;a href="http://www.microsoft.com/video/en/us/details/1eea789b-c69c-4b09-a13b-b7422c0ff104?vp_evt=eref&amp;vp_video=Expression+SketchFlow" rel="nofollow"&gt;Sketchflow&lt;/a&gt; goes a lot farther as it allows for rapid wireframing of views in any workflow, plus it also provides a library of drawing controls and sample data creation capability and it allows a player to sequentially walk thru mockedup UI screens in a browser - all pretty powerful stuff.  You can even interact with the controls in the forms, and solicit and capture feedback from the user!

I suspect it will evolve rapidly as this kind of design prototype support has always been sorely needed and now needed even more with the advancement of the presentation quality of WCF and Silverlight.  As we continue to build out the offerings for our &lt;a href="http://www.outformations.com/What_We_Do/Agile_Enterprise_JumpStart.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Agile Enterprise JumpStart&lt;/a&gt;, we will be including some mentoring on leading practices for prototyping view UI's at the story level, and most likely be able to bring both Balsamiq and Sketchflow to bear based on which tool is the best for the design task at hand.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m trying to wrap my head around SketchFlow, and in particular whether it truly has capability to evolve mockup into functional prototype.  Here is a collection of very interesting and informative <a href='http://electricbeach.org/?tag=sketchflow' target='_none' rel="nofollow">BLOGs</a> from Christian Schormann.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that it is integrated into <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/expression/" rel="nofollow">Expression Blend</a> and does not stand alone like Balsamiq: </p>
<p><a href="http://www.balsamiq.com/products/mockups" rel="nofollow">Balsamiq</a> is very lightweight, provides pre-drawn widgets to work with and is strictly a visual mockup that can&#8217;t evolve into a working prototype.   It does however allow a full screen mode and dynamic linking across mockup files, but that&#8217;s about it.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/video/en/us/details/1eea789b-c69c-4b09-a13b-b7422c0ff104?vp_evt=eref&#038;vp_video=Expression+SketchFlow" rel="nofollow">Sketchflow</a> goes a lot farther as it allows for rapid wireframing of views in any workflow, plus it also provides a library of drawing controls and sample data creation capability and it allows a player to sequentially walk thru mockedup UI screens in a browser - all pretty powerful stuff.  You can even interact with the controls in the forms, and solicit and capture feedback from the user!</p>
<p>I suspect it will evolve rapidly as this kind of design prototype support has always been sorely needed and now needed even more with the advancement of the presentation quality of WCF and Silverlight.  As we continue to build out the offerings for our <a href="http://www.outformations.com/What_We_Do/Agile_Enterprise_JumpStart.html" rel="nofollow">Agile Enterprise JumpStart</a>, we will be including some mentoring on leading practices for prototyping view UI&#8217;s at the story level, and most likely be able to bring both Balsamiq and Sketchflow to bear based on which tool is the best for the design task at hand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
