From: David Wagner <>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 18:05:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [e-lang] "Capability Myths Demolished" (was: Software security workshop)

I'm not sure whether I understand your position. 

Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that the entire security
community understands the term "capability" to mean one thing. 
Let's assume this was prompted by a misunderstanding, but is now an
established usage.  Now what? tyler

I see two strategies. 
 (1) Pin all hopes on reclaiming the word "capabilities" to mean what
 you want, and put this in the critical path, so that you cannot succeed
 in communicating the benefits of E-like systems to others until you've
 succeeded in winning the terminology battle.
 (2) Focus on communicating the positive benefits of E-like capability
 systems, under any name, and leave the terminology battle to be pursued
 concurrently or later or never at all.
Let's put aside for the moment which seems more fair or historically
accurate; if the goal is to persuade the security community of the value
of E-like capability systems, which strategy seems most likely to achieve
this goal?  If that's not the goal, why not? tyler

Ok, the above is an exaggeration,  and these two examples are really
two extremes that probably noone would advocate in such a pure form in
practice.  But I still allege that it is a good idea to think tactically,
and these examples might help with that.  Do you disagree?
e-lang mailing list