Nick Gall's Weblog

Saturday, July 12, 2003

Absolute Truth. A nice pragmatic (Rortian) definition from Douglas Purdy of Microsoft:

From the Wise Man's Dictionary: Absolute Truth == What I currently believe based on my finite mental capability operating on somewhat shoty data.

7:24:56 AM

Friday, July 11, 2003

Tight vs. Loose Coupling. In searching for discussions of the relationship between AOP (Aspect-Oriented Programming) and SOAP envelope processing (so far nothing), I ran across a good chart comparing tight and loose coupling. It raised a number of aspects that I have not yet focused on, e.g., references, ontology, and schema. Much food for thought in my thinking on designing for change. For example, what is the relationship between interoperability and adaptability?

7:36:38 AM

Thursday, July 10, 2003

All your base are belong to us. Blew the whole morning surfing blogs, but came up with a real gem: "All your base are belong to us." Sometimes I feel like I'm way behind the curve. But I'm catching up. "All your base" is a perfect example of the organic creation of content enabled by the Web. Truly inspiring. I can't even begin to describe how important such examples are.
7:27:29 AM

Wednesday, July 09, 2003

Are "interface" and "catalyst" the same thing? Something got me thinking about catalysts again, and it struck me that the definition of catalyst and the definition of interface are deeply intertwined if not identical. An interface is a point of interaction between two or more distinct things (systems, processes, substances, chemicals, particles, etc.). A catalyst is such a point of interaction (i.e., reaction) that is not changed or consumed by the interaction. It is not an input (reactant) or output (product) of the interaction. It is the "fixed point" in the interaction.

Note that discussions of catalysts and catalysis speak of "providing a lower energy pathway between the reactants and the products." (See catalysis. Emphasis mine.) Metaphors such as pathways, channels, transports, mediums, abound in talk of both catalysts and interfaces.

The interesting insight from this generalization of catalyst/interface is that one can think of the quality of an interface in terms of how much it lowers the energy pathway (i.e., lowers the activation energy) between provider and consumer. Thus, an interesting avenue to pursue is to compare the concepts of loose coupling and accelerating interaction. Another interesting avenue to pursue is to see if the catalysis metaphor can shed light on the notion of binding an interface to its implementation.

7:57:17 AM

Tuesday, July 08, 2003

Is an "End-to-End" Internet the only "true" Internet? Interesting post by Lawrence Lessig, a Stanford Law professor who focuses on IP issues. He cites Saltzer, Clark and Reed's "End-To-End Arguments In System Design"as his definition of the "Internet." Given my beliefs about how Web services breaks down the end-to-end vs in-the-net dichotomy, I'll respond when I have more time.
5:33:30 AM

Sunday, July 06, 2003

Towards a Science of Modularity. Applied X is about the interface of Theory X and Medium Y. Applied physics, applied math, applied comp sci. Often such applied disciplines are looked down upon by their respective pure theory disciplines. But it is in the application of theory that the action takes place.

What is needed, though, is a general theory of "application." What is common to all types of applied theory? One thing that is clear is that the people applying the theory have to be dual experts: expert in the theory being applied and expert in the medium to which it is being applied. Of course, such a medium has its own theory, so such people must be experts in two theories. This leads to the concern that a jack of two trades is not a master of either.

But there is a third expertise involved in such cases: expertise in the theory of application itself, of interfaces generally. The various bodies of theories are simply a modularization of knowledge. Thus, like all modular systems, the modular framework that separates the disciplines and interfaces them, is subject to the same "laws of modularity." It is such "laws of modularity" that I hope to "discover" (uncover/reveal) and describe as a "Science of Modularity." (SoM) Or perhaps "Liminal Science." Google both of these terms.

It is such an SoM that Herbert Simon was pursuing in "Sciences of the Artificial." (SotA) SoM is a generalization of SotA, in that it studies both natural and artificial forms of modularity and modular evolution. SoM is really also the underlying unity among the various "General Systems Theories" out there. They focus mostly on the boxes, SoM focuses on the lines connecting the boxes.

8:14:44 AM