<?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: Design by Example or Test-Driven Development?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kerrybuckley.org/2009/04/28/design-by-example-or-test-driven-development/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kerrybuckley.org/2009/04/28/design-by-example-or-test-driven-development/</link>
	<description>What's the simplest thing that could possibly go wrong?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:30:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Markus Gärtner</title>
		<link>http://www.kerrybuckley.org/2009/04/28/design-by-example-or-test-driven-development/comment-page-1/#comment-28036</link>
		<dc:creator>Markus Gärtner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kerrybuckley.org/?p=274#comment-28036</guid>
		<description>Basically leaving out the word &#039;test&#039; in a definition is claimed to be useful for Agile Acceptance Testing as well. Gojko Adzic suggests to name Acceptance Testing as Specification By Example in order to get the buy-in from customer representatives during a requirements gathering process. The key stakeholder for tdd is - as you put it correctly from my point of view - questionable for a similar renaming.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Basically leaving out the word &#8216;test&#8217; in a definition is claimed to be useful for Agile Acceptance Testing as well. Gojko Adzic suggests to name Acceptance Testing as Specification By Example in order to get the buy-in from customer representatives during a requirements gathering process. The key stakeholder for tdd is &#8211; as you put it correctly from my point of view &#8211; questionable for a similar renaming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.469 seconds -->

