Re: OVC Architecture Decision Tree

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Wed Jun 30 2004 - 12:04:43 CDT

> I disagree. There are a few things that may be orthogonal, but most
> decisions flow one after the other.

I still don't see it at all. Your note makes me even more convinced of

For example, all of these are possible:

  networked, paper, free software
  networked, paper, proprietary
  networked, dre, free software
  networked, dre, proprietary
  non-networked, paper, free software
  non-networked, paper, proprietary
  non-networked, dre, free software
  non-networked, dre, proprietary

Every single cell in the three dimensions are filled. Of course,
they're not all GOOD; but they are certainly conceptually available.

Likewise, add the fourth dimension, "commodity/custom hardware"...
again, all 16 cells are filled.

Now add full-face vs. contest-per-page. That's a fifth orthogonal
dimension, all 32 cells are filled.

There's just no tree to be found anywhere in there. Sure, if you
really love circles and arrows, you can pick a small selection of
cells, and draw some lines between them. But it's a cheezy conceptual

See, for example, "Powerpoint Makes You Stupid",
article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000482464>. The false tree seems
like an example of the same brain-drain.

WAY down the line, it's true that once you decide paper, the choice of
what the paper looks like is dependent on that. But even there,
barcodes are independent of shape-of-paper, are independent of
under-glass, are independent of full/summary, are independent of...
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:28 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:30 CDT