[cap-talk] Capability begginer questions

[Valerio Bellizzomi]

On 04/10/2007, at 6.37, James A. Donald wrote:

>Valerio Bellizzomi wrote:
> > I find it silly to say that Capability based systems
> > are more imagined or largely nonexistent. As long as
> > ONE implementation exists, they are real.
> >
> > They are not widely used, but that is a side question.
>
>In engineering, terminology in large part follows,
>rather than precedes, widespread usage.

Not when the terminology is part of the engineering effort, is well
defined, and not confusing.

>
>Some of the material posted on this list would be more
>appropriate in a definitive guide, a guide that can only
>come into existence when we have real world experience
>with real world use under real world attack.
>
>The Wright brothers plane did not exist until it flew,
>and a capability system does not exist until it comes
>under real world attack and resists that attack, and it
>will not come under real world attack until widely
>deployed.

Once one thing is built, it exists, regardless of its usage and success.
The time and effort spent to build it are real.

>
>A system that is widely deployed, and works, is likely
>to redefine the terminology.  The first WIMP GUI was
>created in the 1960s, the term "WIMP" coined in 1980,
>the first commercially successful such system created in
>1984, but the terminology by which we talk about and
>understand GUIs comes substantial part from Microsoft's
>work in the 1990s.  It was in the 1990s that Microsoft
>and Apple released guidelines for these interfaces,
>guidelines that swiftly underwent major change.

Sincerely speaking, I might care about Apple guidelines, but I cannot care
less of Microsoft guidelines.
However, I did not intend to start a flame.

>
>First the such interfaces were created, then they were
>created such that they came into wide use, and only then
>were definitive guides issued defining things and
>telling people how to write WIMP GUIs.

Unfortunately they came into wide use.