<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">

<channel>
<title>Can data tell us whether a logo is good or not? That's open to interpretation.  : Responses</title>
<description>Design Observer ::Â Join the Discussion</description>
<link>http://observatory.designobserver.com/feature/branding-by-numbers/37660/</link>
<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
<dc:creator>Design Observer Group</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2013-02-04T13:47:59-05:00</dc:date>
<copyright>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0</copyright>




<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "Can data tell us whether a logo is good or not? That's open to interpretation. "]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[I'm sorry, but this is exactly the kind of info I DON"T want to see. The data is arbitrarily plucked from thin air. The information is ambiguous and vague. I hate to be so harsh, but this site confounds instead of providing clarity, and the infographics are straight out of PowerPoint.]]></description>
	<author></author>
	<link>http://observatory.designobserver.com/feature/branding-by-numbers/37660/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2013-02-04T13:47:59-05:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "Can data tell us whether a logo is good or not? That's open to interpretation. "]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[Had no idea this site existed thanks for writing about it. ]]></description>
	<author>jj</author>
	<link>http://observatory.designobserver.com/feature/branding-by-numbers/37660/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2013-02-02T19:53:59-05:00</dc:date>
</item>



</channel>
</rss>

	


