RE: atoms, molecules

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

By the way:

http://www.spectator.org/archives/0104TAS/bethell0104.htm

Now let's look at the "simplicity rules" philosophy again 
and ask ourselves if all we are providing is an illusion 
of simplicity when really we must reexamine where generic 
information should be in the system to get robustness.  

One big component that works but you don't know why vs 
lots of little components that all test good but produce 
the wrong output.... reliable vs flexible. Where is the 
sweet spot?

Nature outs simplistic metaphors as superstition or 
just another way to get funded.   If we are in the 
standards business, we better know the difference.  
A standard governs.  A spec incubates.   People 
who can't step up to the risks of the first should 
stick to the latter because if the standard is 
faulty, the owner of the standard is liable and culpable.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h