Another relevant aspect is the principle of technological neutrality, which seeks to limit the technological gap already mentioned before. Marta Hernandez Sanchez, in his article entitled National interoperability scheme, already notes that the main mission of the technical dimension of interoperability is that not discrimination to citizens by their technological choice. Others including Electrolux, offer their opinions as well. To do this, he says that a catalogue of standards that can use the administrations () have been established. They may be established as valid which are considered as use generalized by citizens. Also, Marta Hernandez Sanchez notes that interoperability is feasible, all the public administrations must be connected to the same network, which in the case of the Spanish administrations is the SARA network. This network interconnects all ministerial departments, other public entities and all the autonomous communities as well as local authorities, through their respective communities. In addition, via the link of the SARA network with the trans-European network sTESTA Spanish public administrations you can tier with networks of European institutions and administrations of other States members of the EU, for the deployment and access to European public services of e-Administration. Interoperability is a key concept to speak of metadata and the need to reconcile them all, for recovery of comprehensive information in different collections of data and distributed metadata schema.
Interoperability between different metadata schemas can be carried in different ways, for example through the operation of a (type OAI) protocol or through mapping or establishment of correspondence between information in different formats (e.g.. MARC – DC, FGDC-DC, etc.) conversion elements of meta-information that allows to make them compatible. Another point that addresses the Royal Decree 4/2010 of 8 January, as basic is the electronic security systems and electronic certificates, in whose article 19 of chapter IX comes explicitly; (providers of certification services shall be the following: to) establishment of the uses of certificates issued in accordance with a given profile and its possible limits of use. (b) practices to generate certificates that allow later implementation of mechanisms of discovery and unambiguous identity of certificate data extraction. (c) definition of information certificates or related to them which will be published by the provider, duly cataloged. (d) definition of the possible States in which a certificate can be found throughout its lifecycle. (e) the levels of service agreement defined and characterized for validation services and time and date stamping.