[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: The Rule of Least Power - does it miss the point?
Not just loose coupling, but variation given repetitive inputs, or novelty seeking. Thus, filtered couplings and what Pangaro called 'through looping'. Today credit systems are pattern seeking. They aren't always precise and can turn off your credit without you doing anything wrong, but generally, they do detect anomalous activity and only err to the conservative side somewhat like the problems of SmartFilter and content and the challenge of filtering porn from kids and adults (generally, the kids will get it and the adults won't but never mind). Any smart mammal that detects filtering can game it so any pattern seeking system has to be a learning system, thus, pragmatics. That maximum indexability is orthogonal to learning is a red herring. It is a so but so what. You still have to filter given a system that maximizes opportunism without a knowledge of type: that is witless. The idea that this leads to a global filter is similarly wrong. It leads to types of filters that are tuned locally. There doesn't have to be a locus of control. In fact, that doesn't work. It has to be lots of them that negotiate when they beat against one another unproductively. Humans are also controllers. The idea of observer as a separate system is somewhat bogus because the 'web' is as Fielding says, a social system and geeks have to deal with even if they are by design, anti-social components. ;-) In response to Andrew: since it is possible that interacting with my accountant was the source of the identity theft (a low paid person on her staff was jailed for fraud), of the options, TurboTax is the best risk given cost, knowledge necessary, and convenience. I don't find embedded scripts abhorrent. I find the idea that all pages must be equally indexable abhorrent. Since page indexing was the use case provide in the RLP finding, it is the best place to begin a critique of the rule. len -----Original Message----- From: Gavin Thomas Nicol [mailto:gtn@r...] Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 10:21 AM To: XML Developers List Subject: Re: The Rule of Least Power - does it miss the point? On Mar 10, 2006, at 9:22 AM, Bullard, Claude L ((Len)) wrote: > True for the global network. False for particular > information flowing at particular times in particular > contexts. "Particular context" sounds to me very much like a frame of evaluation == local processing. Even in closed systems involving only a few machine, only one system at a given time has a complete understanding of it's local processing context. The degree of variance in interpretation will likely be less than in open systems however. I think it's fairly well understood that in general, loose coupling, is a good thing (not always, but usually). I think this "rule" (which I agree is a bogus term for it) is just a common sense design principal that is similar in nature to the principle of loose coupling... basically, it just says, wherever possible, make it easy to process the data you generate, and declare behaviours in a way amenable to analysis. Something similar can be found in "The Art of Programming" (I think chapter 7, might be wrong), where they say "encode your data in text wherever you can"... Maybe I'm just of of the few people that finds embedded scripts, and things like DHTML, abhorrent for the most part. > But the lesson is > that unconstrainable use of a global identifier in a > system that is quick to grant privileges and slow to > revoke them is a bad thing. This is really orthogonal to the issue of maximising the ability to analyse and reuse data. > Another way to think about this: if data is marked > correctly with regards as to operations that can > be performed on it, then the object can acquire > rights from the governing environment or have them > revoked. Controlling capabilities is again, orthogonal to the ability to analyse/reuse data because it implies some global means of control that may or may not exist. You can declare what is valid on the object as much as you like, but ultimately, I will decide what to do with the bits on my box, unless we are bound by the same controlling mechanism. The likelihood of that every occurring is so low that you'd best keep your skeletons in your own closet, with the door firmly locked.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|