Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: Need help with certificate

Expand Messages
  • Martin Fouts
    The user interface is merely a symptom of the design failure of the underlying architecture. If the security requirements led to the arcane security
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      The user interface is merely a symptom of the design failure of the
      underlying architecture.

      If the "security requirements" led to the arcane "security" approach, then
      the underlying failure goes back as far as understanding the actual
      requirements of the system.

      Any system can be incrementally modified into some other system. The
      question isn't "can we", the question is "should we"; and unless you're
      interests run to wallowing in the Turing tar pit, for the "security"
      architecture of LotW, the answer is a resounding no.

      Sometimes, especially when it's still early days, it's better to fix the
      mistake than to paper over it with a UI kludge
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Dave Bernstein [mailto:aa6yq@...]
      Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 10:24 PM
      To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: Need help with certificate


      Sorry, I didn't mean that you should re-architect and re-implement
      the entire system. As your earlier note seemed to focus on the user
      interface, I thought you might be interested in re-implementing TQSL
      and/or TQSLCert to address their acknowledged shortcomings in this
      area.

      I am of the opinion that LotW's useability can be incrementally
      improved to the point where most users will find it "natural".
      Whether or not the current complexity -- generated by the security
      requirements, the centralized architecture, and other design
      decisions -- was justified is moot, unless one is writing a case
      study.
    • Dave Bernstein
      I agree that architecturally flawed systems in general can t be papered over with better UIs. I don t believe that LotW s security requirements were
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree that architecturally flawed systems in general can't be
        papered over with better UIs. I don't believe that LotW's security
        requirements were inappropriate. I do think that users are
        unnecessarily exposed to complexity and error-prone manual
        procedures, but believe that this can be rectified with by adding the
        appropriate functionality.

        It would have been entertaining to see your description of how a disk
        drive's head positioning system can be incrementally modified into an
        air traffic control system, but I think we're better off agreeing to
        disagree.

        73,

        Dave, AA6YQ

        --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Martin Fouts" <lists@f...> wrote:
        > The user interface is merely a symptom of the design failure of the
        > underlying architecture.
        >
        > If the "security requirements" led to the arcane "security"
        approach, then
        > the underlying failure goes back as far as understanding the actual
        > requirements of the system.
        >
        > Any system can be incrementally modified into some other system.
        The
        > question isn't "can we", the question is "should we"; and unless
        you're
        > interests run to wallowing in the Turing tar pit, for the "security"
        > architecture of LotW, the answer is a resounding no.
        >
        > Sometimes, especially when it's still early days, it's better to
        fix the
        > mistake than to paper over it with a UI kludge
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Dave Bernstein [mailto:aa6yq@a...]
        > Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 10:24 PM
        > To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: Need help with certificate
        >
        >
        > Sorry, I didn't mean that you should re-architect and re-implement
        > the entire system. As your earlier note seemed to focus on the user
        > interface, I thought you might be interested in re-implementing TQSL
        > and/or TQSLCert to address their acknowledged shortcomings in this
        > area.
        >
        > I am of the opinion that LotW's useability can be incrementally
        > improved to the point where most users will find it "natural".
        > Whether or not the current complexity -- generated by the security
        > requirements, the centralized architecture, and other design
        > decisions -- was justified is moot, unless one is writing a case
        > study.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.