<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Standards and Content LifeCycle</title>
	<atom:link href="http://apoorv.info/2007/08/07/standards-and-content-lifecycle/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://apoorv.info/2007/08/07/standards-and-content-lifecycle/</link>
	<description>Random Thoughts</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 07:41:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Abhijit Nadgouda</title>
		<link>http://apoorv.info/2007/08/07/standards-and-content-lifecycle/#comment-4365</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Abhijit Nadgouda]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2007 03:44:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.apoorv.info/2007/08/07/standards-and-content-lifecycle/#comment-4365</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[True, one product which can provide for process design and implementation can be convenient. However, I believe that such functionalities will truly depend on the context and the needs, and might vary a lot.

I agree more with later part of your post - standards. The problem lies in difficulty in getting multiple products talk with each other rather than the number of products as such. Standards can define interfaces for various functionalities, and reduce the effort in making the products interoperable.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>True, one product which can provide for process design and implementation can be convenient. However, I believe that such functionalities will truly depend on the context and the needs, and might vary a lot.</p>
<p>I agree more with later part of your post &#8211; standards. The problem lies in difficulty in getting multiple products talk with each other rather than the number of products as such. Standards can define interfaces for various functionalities, and reduce the effort in making the products interoperable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

