General talk about software patterns

[Christian Köppe <christian.koppe AT hu.nl>]

Al,

"I'm afraid that if we want to be part of a serious and professional discussion based on scientific and logical concepts, we obviously need to make a clear and complete argument (or question)."

Talking about being profesional: you still claim on your website and in your papers that your papers are accepted for publication in the proceedings of the PLoP conferences (and ACM DL). This is not true, as you never showed up (two times) and therefore your papers weren't discussed in the workshops and therefore not published in the proceedings.

Furthermore I have the same comments on your work which I also had during the last discussion on this list: your work misses any real (empirical) background (which I expect from a professional, think at least about the Rule of Three, there furthermore exists a large body of literature on Concepts, which you do not mention at all), your patterns suffer strongly from the world-peace syndrom and nearly all of your strong claims are unsupported ("The information pattern family can provide comparable capabilities to the ones provided by multithreaded and distributed applications/processes, while at the same time improving overall complexity, decoupling, encapsulation, reusability and scalability. As a consequence, software engineering processes are also improved in terms of reliability, cost, implementation timeframes and so forth.").

Usually I'm more than willing to help, but as I (and others) already did put quite a lot of energy in giving you feedback, which imho. has not been considered seriously, I do not see a reason why I should do it again.


Regards,
Christian Köppe

---

Van: patterns-discussion-bounces AT cs.uiuc.edu [patterns-discussion-bounces AT cs.uiuc.edu] namens Messaging Design Pattern [dsheppard2k AT yahoo.com]
Verzonden: zaterdag 12 mei 2012 22:52
Aan: Ward Cunningham
CC: gang-of-4-patterns AT cs.uiuc.edu; telecom-patterns AT cs.uiuc.edu; ipc-patterns AT cs.uiuc.edu; patterns-discussion AT cs.uiuc.edu
Onderwerp: Re: [patterns-discussion] [telecom-patterns] Realistic Information Model and Concepts

Again, I don't intend to be rude/mean or anything. I'm afraid that if we want to be part of a serious and professional discussion based on scientific and logical concepts, we obviously need to make a clear and complete argument (or question). Commenting without understanding >the complete document< seems premature (risky): "not enough information associations/concepts  to make  informed/logical decisions regarding the matter being studied". Easy way to miss information and be wrong.

The message requesting feedback was very clear:

"Also, I would appreciate it if you could keep making your questions/comments as specific as possible. This allows me to send appropriate  responses. Feel free to quote specific sections of the draft."

These 'concepts' should be fairly obvious. Also keep in mind that this is a draft (looking for feedback).  BTW, No point in becoming too personal (emotional) about matters that are factual/logical/mathematical in nature. It is good to hear that I didn't make the R-pile (rude pile) then I would be really worried: ;-). You see, "polite" is a good/obvious concept when dealing with others. Direct/Straightforward messaging is also best.

In summary, let's focus on the 'Concepts' presented by the paper based on logical/rational arguments, discussion and questions (obviously).

Regards,

Al