premise

from on scientific technical debt#conclusion

Software code is more accessible than science writing because software has a well-defined general-domain, to standardise special-domain composition; and science does not (but ought to)

Inaccessibility is one aspect of technical-debt. Refactoring technical-debt, by principled iterative recomposition of special-domain concepts, around standardised principles, primitives and intermediates, of a well-defined general-domain, improves accessibility, productivity and quality.

domain translation

Consider accessibility as ‘domain translation’

To make writing/ code accessible, we translate from a special-domain, to an implicit general-domain; such that special-concepts are recomposed from more general-concepts; then re-described in corresponding terms.

general-domain primitives

The basis of any general-domain are primitives: the smallest units of composition, from which all other complexity is composed.

Primitives: for writing are {language; basic concepts}; for software are {language; standard library}

Software’s general-domain is ‘well-defined’ because it includes standards for recomposition, including standardised intermediate-generalisations, known as ‘common design patterns’

general-domain intermediate-generalisations

Common design patterns, or intermediate generalisations :

  1. Represent structural and behavioural characteristics, common across arbitrarily-plural special-domains (special-domain invariant)
  2. Increase the volume and sophistication of defined conceptual vocabulary available for recomposition

The more well-defined the general-domain, the easier the task of recomposing special-domain-concepts, to standardised form.

general perspective

Consider :

  1. The result of a successful push to make science writing accessible: arbitrarily plural special-concepts, from distinct special-domains, are (to varying degree) recomposed from simpler common constituents – standardised concepts from a single common general-domain – a new general-perspective
    1. Incidental detail remains, but as relative delta, to standardised norms
  2. A general-perspective does not replace special-perspectives, but relates and reframes special distinction, by relative commonality

intermediate-generalisation summary

  1. To use intermediate-generalisations (common design patterns), is to translate by pre-synchronised well-defined concepts
  2. The more well-defined the general-domain, the easier the task of recomposing special-domain-concepts, to standardised form
  3. Once familiar with translating own special-knowledge to the general-domain, interpretive generosity (self-recontextualisation of others ambiguous communication) improves