Operational misfits in concepts reveal design flaws without requiring implementation or testing

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• The operational principle of a concept should mention only that concept and its directly or indirectly depended concepts.claim0.780
  A rule relating operational principle to dependence graph.
• Design and engineering knowledge are not reducible to scientific principles; operational principles are needed.claim0.766
  Polanyi's argument applied to software.
• The four concept criteria (motivation, no redundancy, no overloading, uniformity) are neither necessary nor sufficient but can explain design flaws.claim0.766
  Acknowledging the heuristic nature of the criteria.
• Simple problems require systems that expose simple solutions; forcing complex solutions signals misaligned abstraction level.claim0.762
  Parlog's merge process for client-server is unnecessarily complex; Linda's tuple operations remain flexible across problem variants.
• A concept should not attempt to serve two distinct purposes; this leads to conflicts and confusion.claim0.760
  No overloading criterion.
• Piggybacking a new purpose onto an existing concept (overloading) causes conflicts and design flaws.claim0.756
  Illustrated with OS X print subsystem example.
• Variant concepts should have similar behaviors; otherwise, users are surprised and modularity suffers.claim0.748
  Uniformity criterion.
• Our present forms of planning, design, construction, and production are deeply flawed because they do not include step-by-step adaptation and cannot in principle do so as they are.claim0.745
  Sweeping indictment of current production systems.