<?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: ¿Qué son Estándares Abiertos?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hardings.cl/blog/2006/01/26/%c2%bfque-son-estandares-abiertos/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hardings.cl/blog/2006/01/26/%c2%bfque-son-estandares-abiertos/</link>
	<description>Ideas, opinions and references relating IT, FLOSS and Security (among others).</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 00:51:40 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Hombros de Gigantes (Shoulders of Giants) &#187; FLOSS, Open Standards, Open Services and Open Infrastructure</title>
		<link>http://www.hardings.cl/blog/2006/01/26/%c2%bfque-son-estandares-abiertos/comment-page-1/#comment-5648</link>
		<dc:creator>Hombros de Gigantes (Shoulders of Giants) &#187; FLOSS, Open Standards, Open Services and Open Infrastructure</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:10:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hardings.cl/blog/2006/01/26/%c2%bfque-son-estandares-abiertos/#comment-5648</guid>
		<description>[...] The differences of FLOSS, Open Standards and Open Services and Open Infrastructure are very interesting, since each of these has its particularities. You would not want to make an open standard free for everyone to change on their own will as many times as they want, since one of the value of standars is that software that implements it can interoperate, so it should be chasing a moving target. On the other hand, anyone should be able to participate in the definition of a standard, but without having the design by committee effect of creating a bloated and far from ideal result by including everyone&#8217;s opinion. Bob Sutor has given it a thought, as has Bruce Perens who even has come up with a proposed definition of the open standards concept on which I have commented previously in spanish. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The differences of FLOSS, Open Standards and Open Services and Open Infrastructure are very interesting, since each of these has its particularities. You would not want to make an open standard free for everyone to change on their own will as many times as they want, since one of the value of standars is that software that implements it can interoperate, so it should be chasing a moving target. On the other hand, anyone should be able to participate in the definition of a standard, but without having the design by committee effect of creating a bloated and far from ideal result by including everyone&#8217;s opinion. Bob Sutor has given it a thought, as has Bruce Perens who even has come up with a proposed definition of the open standards concept on which I have commented previously in spanish. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
