<?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: Emphasizing Visitor Experience</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.art21.org/2008/10/17/emphasizing-visitor-experience/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.art21.org/2008/10/17/emphasizing-visitor-experience/</link>
	<description>The Official Blog of Art21, Inc. and the &#60;i&#62;Art in the Twenty-First Century&#60;/i&#62; PBS series</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 17:30:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: charlie roderick</title>
		<link>http://blog.art21.org/2008/10/17/emphasizing-visitor-experience/comment-page-1/#comment-9209</link>
		<dc:creator>charlie roderick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:33:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.art21.org/2008/10/17/emphasizing-visitor-experience/#comment-9209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[as an artist and educator living in denver i&#039;m curious about these experiential &quot;exchanges&quot; between the public/audience and the mca as an institution, and it&#039;s very exciting to see dynamic approaches to engaging audience, but what i wonder is why this conversation seems to always skirt a concern for accessibility. a tech savvy audience is certainly a population, but undoubtedly and audience with access to that technology. the mca denver has been promoting itself as &quot;open source&quot;, or &quot;the museum without a front door&quot;, so am i to believe that engagement and voice (via a commenting online profile, or a museum that never locks/closes) is an extension of this proposed ideology. just wondering if i understand the terms as presented by cydney payton and the mca, and how transparent that truly is.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>as an artist and educator living in denver i&#8217;m curious about these experiential &#8220;exchanges&#8221; between the public/audience and the mca as an institution, and it&#8217;s very exciting to see dynamic approaches to engaging audience, but what i wonder is why this conversation seems to always skirt a concern for accessibility. a tech savvy audience is certainly a population, but undoubtedly and audience with access to that technology. the mca denver has been promoting itself as &#8220;open source&#8221;, or &#8220;the museum without a front door&#8221;, so am i to believe that engagement and voice (via a commenting online profile, or a museum that never locks/closes) is an extension of this proposed ideology. just wondering if i understand the terms as presented by cydney payton and the mca, and how transparent that truly is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lindsey</title>
		<link>http://blog.art21.org/2008/10/17/emphasizing-visitor-experience/comment-page-1/#comment-8926</link>
		<dc:creator>lindsey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:03:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.art21.org/2008/10/17/emphasizing-visitor-experience/#comment-8926</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Awesome postings!  I learned a great many things about the St. Louis Art scene!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Awesome postings!  I learned a great many things about the St. Louis Art scene!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->