<?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: JOOMLA! Word Association and Semantics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://beautyindesign.com/blog/joomla-word-association-and-semantics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://beautyindesign.com/blog/joomla-word-association-and-semantics/</link>
	<description>Web Design and Development Training and Tutorials</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 16:18:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Louis Landry</title>
		<link>http://beautyindesign.com/blog/joomla-word-association-and-semantics/comment-page-1/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>Louis Landry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 03:19:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://beautyindesign.com/?p=254#comment-49</guid>
		<description>It would depend upon the change implemented :)  Text strings are easy, filesystem paths and database table names are harder.  All depends on the ideas.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would depend upon the change implemented :)  Text strings are easy, filesystem paths and database table names are harder.  All depends on the ideas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://beautyindesign.com/blog/joomla-word-association-and-semantics/comment-page-1/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 02:43:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://beautyindesign.com/?p=254#comment-48</guid>
		<description>Implementing a change in the 1.X line would render lots of existing extensions useless, no?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Implementing a change in the 1.X line would render lots of existing extensions useless, no?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Louis Landry</title>
		<link>http://beautyindesign.com/blog/joomla-word-association-and-semantics/comment-page-1/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>Louis Landry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 02:35:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://beautyindesign.com/?p=254#comment-47</guid>
		<description>Changing mambots to plugins was one of my first commits to the core.  It was a big deal, but the changes to the way the events system worked were more substantial and far-reaching than the name.  Changing something like components would obviously have some far-reaching effects, but that does not mean we shouldn&#039;t consider it.  I doubt that it is something we could really do in the 1.x series... but then again if you come up with a good idea... and present it well... its amazing what can be done :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Changing mambots to plugins was one of my first commits to the core.  It was a big deal, but the changes to the way the events system worked were more substantial and far-reaching than the name.  Changing something like components would obviously have some far-reaching effects, but that does not mean we shouldn&#8217;t consider it.  I doubt that it is something we could really do in the 1.x series&#8230; but then again if you come up with a good idea&#8230; and present it well&#8230; its amazing what can be done :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://beautyindesign.com/blog/joomla-word-association-and-semantics/comment-page-1/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:53:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://beautyindesign.com/?p=254#comment-46</guid>
		<description>Yeh Rob mentioned changing the terminology is more than just changing a word.  I didn&#039;t even think about how it could actually affect the API.  Cheesh, was it a nightmare changing mambots to plugins?!  I, too, think of components as &quot;sub-applications&quot;, much like Facebook has applications.  From the different systems I&#039;ve worked with, Joomla and Wordpress have the best naming conventions out there!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeh Rob mentioned changing the terminology is more than just changing a word.  I didn&#8217;t even think about how it could actually affect the API.  Cheesh, was it a nightmare changing mambots to plugins?!  I, too, think of components as &#8220;sub-applications&#8221;, much like Facebook has applications.  From the different systems I&#8217;ve worked with, Joomla and WordPress have the best naming conventions out there!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Louis Landry</title>
		<link>http://beautyindesign.com/blog/joomla-word-association-and-semantics/comment-page-1/#comment-45</link>
		<dc:creator>Louis Landry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:21:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://beautyindesign.com/?p=254#comment-45</guid>
		<description>Your reasoning is sound, but we already have the concept of applications within Joomla.  The Site is an application, the Installer is an application and the Administrator is an application.  I have always sort of looked at the components as sub-applications though obviously that probably wouldn&#039;t serve to &quot;unglaze&quot; your clients&#039; eyes.

We do take a lot of time in thinking about our semantic naming and I really would love to see a brainstorm on what other potential better names may exist for components.

Good thoughts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your reasoning is sound, but we already have the concept of applications within Joomla.  The Site is an application, the Installer is an application and the Administrator is an application.  I have always sort of looked at the components as sub-applications though obviously that probably wouldn&#8217;t serve to &#8220;unglaze&#8221; your clients&#8217; eyes.</p>
<p>We do take a lot of time in thinking about our semantic naming and I really would love to see a brainstorm on what other potential better names may exist for components.</p>
<p>Good thoughts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
