<?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>Commentaires pour Appliweb</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.appliweb.net/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.appliweb.net</link>
	<description>All dimensions of your web developments</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:06:47 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Commentaires sur JSF with a web designer par wpadmin</title>
		<link>http://blog.appliweb.net/2008/12/jsf-with-a-web-designer/comment-page-1/#comment-140</link>
		<dc:creator>wpadmin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:06:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.appliweb.net/?p=99#comment-140</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m currently evaluating Wicket for Appliweb project. What a relief ! Simple stuff, cleanly designed.
That sounds good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m currently evaluating Wicket for Appliweb project. What a relief ! Simple stuff, cleanly designed.<br />
That sounds good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Commentaires sur JSF with a web designer par commonner</title>
		<link>http://blog.appliweb.net/2008/12/jsf-with-a-web-designer/comment-page-1/#comment-139</link>
		<dc:creator>commonner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:05:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.appliweb.net/?p=99#comment-139</guid>
		<description>I guess WICKET would have been a pretty good choice here, it&#039;s very flexible regarding the html, and you&#039;d prolly just have integrated the designer&#039;s html &amp; css as is, added a few wicket:id tags on key elements to add some logics, and that would be it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess WICKET would have been a pretty good choice here, it&#8217;s very flexible regarding the html, and you&#8217;d prolly just have integrated the designer&#8217;s html &amp; css as is, added a few wicket:id tags on key elements to add some logics, and that would be it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Commentaires sur JSF with a web designer par kristian</title>
		<link>http://blog.appliweb.net/2008/12/jsf-with-a-web-designer/comment-page-1/#comment-135</link>
		<dc:creator>kristian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 11:14:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.appliweb.net/?p=99#comment-135</guid>
		<description>this has been our experience too; we finally switched to Tapestry</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this has been our experience too; we finally switched to Tapestry</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Commentaires sur Fragmented Java or no Java ? par John Smith</title>
		<link>http://blog.appliweb.net/2009/06/fragmented-java-or-no-java/comment-page-1/#comment-127</link>
		<dc:creator>John Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 12:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.appliweb.net/?p=73#comment-127</guid>
		<description>The good thing about your fragmented platform that is Java based is that it will not gain enough marketshare where it will matter that you need to test on all platforms.  The low number of users on each device will mean that it won&#039;t be cost effective.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The good thing about your fragmented platform that is Java based is that it will not gain enough marketshare where it will matter that you need to test on all platforms.  The low number of users on each device will mean that it won&#8217;t be cost effective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
