Yes, don’t disagree but I don’t think that is where the title is coming from. I think the whole point was to play off of Kim’s “Laws” and say there are new ones in play. There is a certain ring to laws and benefits in terms of capturing audience. It probably gets more attention than Design Requirements for Relationship Management. This is an initial work and of even more interest to me is the mutability of the requirements as a topic in play as opposed to the title of the document as a whole. One of the things we may find is that the permutations of relationships mean that even laws/requirements may need a bit of if, then. Among our next steps is taking the document apart, ideally law by law but overall is fine too as we look to reconstitute the “laws”. We can put this in play on Tuesday, will get an agenda out and look forward to getting together then. Don’t forget to follow @irmwg and join the linkedin group and contribute to the conversation there as well. Good balance of the weekend to all, Sal From: Susan Morrow [mailto:susan.morrow@avocosecure.com] Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2015 1:56 AM To: j stollman Cc: Salvatore D'Agostino; dg-idot@kantarainitiative.org Subject: Re: [DG-IDoT] Laws of Relationships I agree with you Jeff and brought up the same issue about being immutable. It also precludes the acceptance of fuzziness in relationships too. I suppose the use of the word 'law' in technology has a different meaning than the use of it in sciences like physics and chemistry. Susan On 8 Mar 2015, at 05:35, j stollman <stollman.j@gmail.com> wrote: Ever since Kim Cameron's Laws of Identity, the industry seems to gravitate towards the use of the term "Laws". But I think what this document really is is a specification of design requirements for a new system(s) capable of meeting the objectives stated in the introduction. I have no particular agita over these design requirements. But I feel that framing them properly as design requirements, rather than laws, offers flexibility to design alternative systems that may select only a subset or explicitly violate one or more laws. At this early stage I prefer this flexibility to the immutable sound of "Laws." Jeff On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com> wrote: Here is the link I mentioned, we also have a twitter handle for the group of @irmwg and use the same for a hashtag #irmwg. https://kantarainitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Kantara-Initiative-... Other Kantara reports are here: https://kantarainitiative.org/reports-recommendations/ Enjoy the weekend. Sal Salvatore D'Agostino IDmachines LLC 1264 Beacon Street, #5 Brookline, MA 02446 USA http://www.idmachines.com <http://www.idmachines.com/> http://idmachines.blogspot.com <http://idmachines.blogspot.com/> @idmachines +1 617.201.4809 <tel:%2B1%20617.201.4809> ph +1 617.812.6495 <tel:%2B1%20617.812.6495> fax _______________________________________________ DG-IDoT mailing list DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot -- Jeff Stollman stollman.j@gmail.com 1 202.683.8699 Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out. Science advances one funeral at a time. Max Planck _______________________________________________ DG-IDoT mailing list DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot