[cap-talk] P-1935 - on old truth and loss of control

[Jed Donnelley]

On 2/1/2008 5:26 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 15:58 -0800, Jed Donnelley wrote:
>> I believe it is clear that this document
>> is the scholarly basis of the concerns
>> about "loss of control" in capability
>> systems.
> 
> A small nit about this. This paper was widely *cited* by scholarly
> papers. P-1935 did not at any time (to my knowledge) receive scholarly
> review, and therefore is not a scholarly paper in itself.

This wasn't the meaning I was intending for "scholarly".
I was using a common definition, as:

Of, relating to, or characteristic of scholars or scholarship

What I was referring to was the fact that the authors did
a huge amount of "research" (reading other papers, surveying
the field, etc.).  It was only 'scholarly' in that sense.
You would know better than I about a more precise definition
of "scholarly" in scholarly circles Jonathan.

I didn't mean that it was reviewed.  As you say I don't
believe it was.

> I agree that P-1935 is an important document in this context. I object
> only to the term "scholarly" applied to that paper.

I accept that objection as per above.

As far as I know P-1935 is the only significant
document to look at all aspects of where the capability
model may be lacking (in their view of course).  Since
it is referred to in the Orange Book in regards to
"lack of control" it seems to me the most significant
reference in this area - r.e. Tyler's question.

As I note, I've come to appreciate what I believe
was really gnawing at them when they wrote this
tome.  I believe this concern about "loss of
control" in the capability model (Granovetter)
is widespread.  I believe that until we answer
these basic concerns, objections and resistance
to capability systems and papers by reviewers
and other customers will be justified.

--Jed  http://www.webstart.com/jed/