<?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: ANSI Establishes Nanotech Standards Panel</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1640" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=1640</link>
	<description>examining transformative technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 18:23:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: chip</title>
		<link>http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=1640#comment-4628</link>
		<dc:creator>chip</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=1640#comment-4628</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Standards for what?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I confess that I&#039;m a little confused by this. Generally when one sets up a standards committee, there is something one is seeking to standardize. What exactly are they supposed to be working on here? I&#039;m not aware of any products or processes where there is an approaching critical mass of interoperability issues that would warrant a standards effort. Is there stuff going on out there that I&#039;m not aware of or is this just more turf grabbing and political posturing from the NNI crown?&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Standards for what?</strong></p>
<p>I confess that I&#39;m a little confused by this. Generally when one sets up a standards committee, there is something one is seeking to standardize. What exactly are they supposed to be working on here? I&#39;m not aware of any products or processes where there is an approaching critical mass of interoperability issues that would warrant a standards effort. Is there stuff going on out there that I&#39;m not aware of or is this just more turf grabbing and political posturing from the NNI crown?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RobertBradbury</title>
		<link>http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=1640#comment-4627</link>
		<dc:creator>RobertBradbury</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:28:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=1640#comment-4627</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;ANSI committees&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Having been a member of the ANSI X3J11 committee that standardized &quot;C&quot; nearly 20 years ago I can testify to both how interesting and agonizing a standard setting process can be. However once C was standardized (rather than sitting in Dennis Ritchie&#039;s head) it became a lot more useful and several companies (Microsoft, Oracle, Sun, etc.) were able to take advantage of that.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I know -- lets send Howard... He&#039;ll write about anything... :-;&lt;/p&gt;

V3 V</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>ANSI committees</strong></p>
<p>Having been a member of the ANSI X3J11 committee that standardized &quot;C&quot; nearly 20 years ago I can testify to both how interesting and agonizing a standard setting process can be. However once C was standardized (rather than sitting in Dennis Ritchie&#39;s head) it became a lot more useful and several companies (Microsoft, Oracle, Sun, etc.) were able to take advantage of that.</p>
<p>I know &#8212; lets send Howard&#8230; He&#39;ll write about anything&#8230; :-;</p>
<p>V3 V</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>