Or “Development”? Whatever a developer chooses to take from this post, it may be applied to development per se, in some areas, just a little? Who’s to say? It’s a well-charted territory: Mike Amundsen (BDFL) already has developed and architected many rigorous and swaggerly demonstrations of the much feared “generic web client”, wherein our understanding is brought to discuss the requirements for both a server too. His book Building Hypermedia APIs with HTML5 and Node kickstarted a campaign, really, of a general style and focus of writing software that is explicit, scientific, testable, highly evolvable and modular: but hypermedia-oriented. Of…

There is no such thing as an unregulated market[1]. What could this determine or mean for “development” of software and web? Let us first remind ourselves that Semantic Web and Software Architecture are two different things: no, they’re not two aspects of the same thing. We could look at the terms themselves a bit, side-by-side, and ask a few questions: Does Web replace Architecture, thus is not itself an architecture? (World Wide Web is supposed to be the poster-project of anarchic imagination ultimately realized.) Is Software necessarily semantically inert?[2], like a Fact (Arianna Betti argues persuasively that there aren’t any…

Sealed Arguments made for Barbohemians

We plutoniumize an argument by not just extending its possible world accidentally, incidentally, contingently, etc. in ways the container expression might fail to predict, given enough tape, of course.

All in the name of the one Great Pataphor above or below, whichever way we go. Where was I? Take the Last Man Argument:

You are not (just) the last human.

Odd. I feel present. But even that is a technology of understanding: the present, presenting presentation, so too grounded in spatial technology, spatial metaphor and metonymic structure.

Why should I need to be re-mind-ed of it? You are not just the last human! As we repeat this practice back and forth until the beginning begins.

A philosopher dies. Usually we leave them to rest, or let the dead bury their dead. Most of them, at any rate. However, in our time of technocratic delirium (as Dwayne Tunstall decries, in Doing Philosophy Personally) and the urgent demand to Do Something!, which comes to some bastardizing expression effectively equivalent to Play! Or Else! (Hi, Google!), and being there, then, just amounts to every body objectifying themselves for the purposes of misrecognizing classifications such that Goethe’s world-nurse manifests herself, to keep every one in a constantly present-ing state of theory-therapy at play. Wow, that wasn’t even fun to…

A major source of confusion or disagreement within discource around hypermedia web implementations and experiments is its lack of standardization of the link relation[1]. Conceptually link relations can either be bound to a potential or possible action or not: it can exist as an mechanism-independent relation to the context of the resource, or some wider context for which a “continuation” may be necessary to guarantee continuity (or, in other words, consistency in a Service Level Agreement’s implicature toward a workflow as a “service word”[2]).

What this means is that certain actions exposed at a resource (e.g., http://example.com/car/12345) may either set…

Typically our stories’ Acceptance Criteria depart like so:

As a user, I want to ...

This is well enough for conveying the intent of the feature to be developed amongst human readers who understand the implications and make inferences about what doing the right thing might look like but in many cases, the existing product already has some pattern of interaction to recreate for novel cases. However, the problem concerns what kind of user is at play: is it a human or is it a machine reading the interface of the application? And furthermore, can we automate the user’s interaction…

If language is generative of communication and learning, what tools would condition the possibility or capability unique to language using living beings? Would it be that non-being confounds the enablement and realization of linguistic machining, languaging and the rest, categorized and classified as productivity, inference, representation and compositionality? Social animals often fail to express these properties even at the level of social praxis (praxeonomics), typically fashioning tools for individual, but not social use beyond mere triviality.

Since the advent of the conceptual scheme, academics and students have engaged in modes of discourse that divide along the distinction of the empirical…

Speaking from Kittler’s point[0], “information hiding” has become a principle of Good Language design; i.e. “encapsulation”, surviving the criticism railed against object-oriented languages (polymorphism and classical inheritance, too, are terrible ideas; but whatever, if an organization or client wants, then the customer gets). So this mentality is the basis from which I make these suggestions. “Hiding” things has become the rule of the day, and I don’t like that; if anything, I want to expose more of the “bare metal” of the underlying systems in the OSI model’s base layer, the Physical layer, to the developers as much as the…