<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>friends.praxeme</title>
	<atom:link href="http://friends.praxeme.org/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://friends.praxeme.org</link>
	<description>We love cheesecake...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 20:56:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>PxFAQ &#8211; Why are CRUD operations generaly located in Set Business Logical Machines?</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/11/pxfaq-why-are-crud-operations-generaly-located-in-set-business-logical-machines/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/11/pxfaq-why-are-crud-operations-generaly-located-in-set-business-logical-machines/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:33:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PxFAQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logical Aspect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Praxeme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=365</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Related questions:

Why separate Elementary and Set machines/operations?
Would it be interesting to add a CRUD Business Logical Machine next to the Elementary and Set ones?

It is clear that we are considering things in the Logical Aspect and that no justifications will come from Technical Aspect.
First shot
CRUD operations are not high level operations. They are instead mandatory [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/11/pxfaq-why-are-crud-operations-generaly-located-in-set-business-logical-machines/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Praxeme and Complex Systems</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/11/praxeme-and-complex-systems/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/11/praxeme-and-complex-systems/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 11:23:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>YvesC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Debates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[emergence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Praxeme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a follow-up to a conversation that started during the meeting of the &#8220;Collège des contributeurs&#8221; last week. Although I do not have the time to post a proper discussion, I&#8217;ll start with a few headlines to &#8220;get the ball rolling&#8221; : start a discussion. Hence I&#8217;ll use an &#8220;outine style&#8221; and leave the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/11/praxeme-and-complex-systems/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PxFAQ: What is this strange thing called Logical Aspect?</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/10/pxfaq-what-is-this-strange-thing-called-logical-aspect/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/10/pxfaq-what-is-this-strange-thing-called-logical-aspect/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:45:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PxFAQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enterprise System Topology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logical Aspect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Praxeme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=350</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Related questions:

Can we use upstream models directly in implementations?
What is the interest of the Logical Aspect if I want to build an SOA?
We put important efforts in upstream aspects, can we make some savings in the logical one?

 The logical aspect is sometimes considered useless and we hear some people willing to save the time [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/10/pxfaq-what-is-this-strange-thing-called-logical-aspect/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PxFAQ: What are the services we *need*?</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/10/pxfaq-what-are-the-services-we-need/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/10/pxfaq-what-are-the-services-we-need/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PxFAQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FAQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Praxeme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=348</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Related questions:


How to find them?
How to assert that they are the right ones?
How to respect the decoupling principle?

By giving clear procedures to deduce services from business inputs, Praxeme solves the problem of finding the right services in the only available way: changing intuition only procedures to analytic thinking. By structuring precisely the considered system in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/10/pxfaq-what-are-the-services-we-need/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BPM and SOA</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/09/bpm-and-soa/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/09/bpm-and-soa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:23:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BPM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=337</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We see more and more attention on relations between SOA and other parts of IT, with important questions like the one raised in the following blog post: http://www.jpmorgenthal.com/morgenthal/?p=103.
Relations between SOA and BPM is like relations between bass guitar and drums. They live separately and have their own rules, but they can produce great music together.
Praxeme [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/09/bpm-and-soa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DNA evidence</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/dna-evidence/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/dna-evidence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 17:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Risks and security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=331</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Often people ask me why I don&#8217;t like the use of DNA and other biological markers as identities. My answer can be expressed in two points:

Biometric data cannot be repudiated. If your biometrics are compromised you cannot change them like you can do when your personal certificate (or password) is compromised.


Biometric data are not secret. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/dna-evidence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Security is a strategic concern</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/security-is-a-strategic-concern/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/security-is-a-strategic-concern/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:02:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Risks and security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chaos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=311</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here is an interesting point of view on security business today from an IBM Security Strategist: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/081709-8-dirty-secrets-of-the.html
Among the eight points some are tightly related to enterprise strategy and enterprise architecture. Points 2, 6 and 7 focus on external concerns, regulations and security product vendors, but  others may be summarized like this: what do I need [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/security-is-a-strategic-concern/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bruce Schneier on Risk Intuition</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/bruce-schneier-on-risk-intuition/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/bruce-schneier-on-risk-intuition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:44:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Behavior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Risks and security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intuition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here is a very good post of security guru Bruce Schneier on how we as individuals are good at evaluating risks: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/08/risk_intuition.html. We often hear that people do not follow rules because they do not understand risks and Schneier shows us that the error is to forget that we do not live in a world [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/bruce-schneier-on-risk-intuition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Get out of the immaturity model (part 2)</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/get-out-of-the-immaturity-model-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/get-out-of-the-immaturity-model-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:36:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blueprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open-mindedness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rationaliztion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[Part 1]
Here are some points to focus on to try to get out of the immaturity model. Some are obvious. Some may sound like weird ideas. But do not underestimate culture: obvious points may not be obvious for everyone and weird things may well be weird only for those who see them for the first [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/get-out-of-the-immaturity-model-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Get out of the immaturity model (part 1)</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/get-out-of-the-immaturity-model-part-1/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/get-out-of-the-immaturity-model-part-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blueprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open-mindedness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rationaliztion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=290</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;IT is a young discipline&#8221; syndrome
For as long as I have worked in IT I have heard this dogmatic explanation. It is used for all sorts of issues ranging from hardware failures to heavily bugged software including huge and astonishingly complex IT solutions without strong relations with business problems. Each time, the maturity idea was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/get-out-of-the-immaturity-model-part-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Innovation warning</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/05/innovation-warning/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/05/innovation-warning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 20:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joke]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=287</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is just a quick note about a dreadful news: IT business is running short of trigrams. Trigrams are those nasty special words made of the three capital letters of some difficult to understand expression we traditionally use to attract interests in a new Graal. Running short of such beasts is a nightmar because without [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/05/innovation-warning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Movies errors, a wish list</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/03/movies-errors-a-wish-list/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/03/movies-errors-a-wish-list/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 23:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Questions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chaos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movie]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lately I re-read a list of errors about computers [fr+en] (sorry for English readers, items are in English but comments are in French) found in movies. It&#8217;s not exactly the first time I&#8217;ve read such a list and it&#8217;s always amusing to see a collection of problems movie makers do about our domain, but this [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/03/movies-errors-a-wish-list/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>An un-designed law</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/03/an-un-designed-law/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/03/an-un-designed-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:32:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design and Methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[References]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ergonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hadopi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Praxeme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here and everywhere
Here in France we have to face a very dangerous bill [fr] that may break some fundamental principles of the internet. It is a quick and dirty answer to those who claim that exchanging files on the net would lead (and in fact would have led) to big losses for music and movie [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/03/an-un-designed-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Emergence: an unusable illusion for companies</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/12/emergence-an-unusable-illusion-for-companies/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/12/emergence-an-unusable-illusion-for-companies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Answers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Behavior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chaos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[emergence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the open source community we see very efficient results emerging from non organized groups of people acting individually. Companies should fear this mechanism because it cannot be used inside organized entities. There are economical explanations of this for example in this book from Clay Shirky: Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/12/emergence-an-unusable-illusion-for-companies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Memes And The Catalog Syndrome</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/memes-and-the-catalog-syndrome/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/memes-and-the-catalog-syndrome/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Behavior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[catalog syndrome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Darwin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[memeplex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[replicator]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Catalog syndrome

The Catalog Syndrome is this special way of solving problems with only technology: we have a technology so no matter what the problem really was, it&#8217;s solved. Why spend a lot of time in analysis and thinkings about a problem when we can jump in a technology which is obviously made to solve [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/memes-and-the-catalog-syndrome/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Open Business Concepts</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/open-concepts/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/open-concepts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:15:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Free & Open]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concepts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Business Concepts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=171</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One Task in Technical Architect&#8217;s Task List
Amongst tasks devoted to the technical architect lies the choice of external solutions. This is a long process that involves the choice of suppliers, the creation of an evaluation grid, RFPs, work with suppliers relation teams, POCs and other evaluation prototypes, synthesis of all information and then presentation of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/open-concepts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A reference from an Open Source supporter</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/a-reference-from-an-open-source-supporter/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/a-reference-from-an-open-source-supporter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:06:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[References]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mozilla]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=95</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On March 2007, Tristan Nitot has written a word about Praxeme. Even if it&#8217;s a little word and an old news, it is important because Tristan is a great defender of open standards and Open Source community.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/a-reference-from-an-open-source-supporter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Cathedral and the Bazaar (Eric Steven Raymond)</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-eric-steven-raymond/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-eric-steven-raymond/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:06:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[References]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[analogy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bazaar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cathedral]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=83</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In 1999 when I joined an Open Source community to port a software on VMS systems, this essay was a must reading for all Open Source fans. It represented some kind of a first description of methods used in Open Source groups. At this time Open Source was seen as parallel system for software editing [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/11/the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-eric-steven-raymond/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dead Poets Society</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/10/dead-poets-society/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/10/dead-poets-society/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Oct 2008 14:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open-mindedness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=67</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is one of my favorite movies.
Not for the poetry, I&#8217;m not very found of it. But for the main message: open-mindedness. When Prof. Keating climbs on the desk to explain how things that we know must be challenged by looking them from another point of view, I always have a special feeling of profound [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/10/dead-poets-society/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Action, Being and Darwin</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/10/action-being-and-darwin/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/10/action-being-and-darwin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 19:19:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Behavior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Darwin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dawkins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.info/?p=56</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since a long time (does it come from the beginning?) IT approach is centered on functions, those classical beasts that are considered essential when analyzing the needs for our systems. It is so important that the term does not only indicate an abstraction used to model the real but it is the retained term for [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2008/10/action-being-and-darwin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
