Update structure to use more footnotes

1 files changed, 12 insertions, 15 deletions

diff --git a/content/blog/slowftware-development.md b/content/blog/slowftware-development.md
index 9884cbe..0b40a8d 100644
--- a/content/blog/slowftware-development.md
+++ b/content/blog/slowftware-development.md
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 title: Slowftware Development
-date: 2024-09-30
+date: 2024-10-04
 draft: false
 ---
 
@@ -64,18 +64,7 @@ have had more impact than the Agile Manifesto in recent years on software develo
 (both good and bad).
 
 Over the years, there has been criticism and debate over the agile values, and how they can undermine various
-disciplines of the software development process, namely documentation and testing. One example is:
-
-> In a letter to IEEE Computer, Steven Rakitin expressed cynicism about agile software development,
-> calling it "yet another attempt to undermine the discipline of software engineering" and translating
-> "**working software over comprehensive documentation**" as "we want to spend all our time coding.
-> Remember, real programmers don't write documentation."
->
-> This is disputed by proponents of agile software development, who state that developers should write documentation
-> if that is the best way to achieve the relevant goals, but that there are often better ways to achieve those goals
-> than writing static documentation.
-
---- [source][17].
+disciplines of the software development process, namely documentation[^1] and testing.
 
 Personally, I think that most of the criticism is targeted towards the interpretation or to be more specific,
 the misinterpretation of the agile principles. That's not to say that there are no merits to the criticism,
@@ -168,7 +157,7 @@ In his [essay][5], he sums up the worse-is-better philosophy as:
 > be sacrificed whenever implementation simplicity is jeopardized. Consistency can be sacrificed to achieve completeness
 > if simplicity is retained; especially worthless is consistency of interface.
 
-This philosophy has been miss-interpreted[^1] (past the catchiness of the phrase), as advocating for doing a bad
+This philosophy has been miss-interpreted[^2] (past the catchiness of the phrase), as advocating for doing a bad
 job with code or architecture. In truth, what the philosophy embodies is a stronger emphasis on quality and
 true agile principles (incremental change and sustainable development pace).
 
@@ -402,7 +391,15 @@ or incorporating these ideas in the development process, which I call "slowftwar
 _Special thank to [Abdallah Dorra][34] for proof-reading and making suggestions on unclear sections._
 
 ---
-[^1]: one famous misinterpretation, a variation adopted early on by Facebook and attributed to its founder,
+[^1]: One example: In a letter to IEEE Computer, Steven Rakitin expressed cynicism about agile software development,
+  calling it "yet another attempt to undermine the discipline of software engineering" and translating
+  "**working software over comprehensive documentation**" as "we want to spend all our time coding.
+  Remember, real programmers don't write documentation."<br>
+  This is disputed by proponents of agile software development, who state that developers should write documentation
+  if that is the best way to achieve the relevant goals, but that there are often better ways to achieve those goals
+  than writing static documentation. [source][17].
+
+[^2]: one famous misinterpretation, a variation adopted early on by Facebook and attributed to its founder,
   Mark Zuckerberg:
   "Move fast and break things and the idea was if unless you're breaking some stuff, you aren't moving fast enough".<br>
   They used it to build software as quickly as possible, even sacrificing correctness for the sake of a quick release.