Info Mapping (TM) Restrictive?

Subject: Info Mapping (TM) Restrictive?
From: Rick Lippincott <rjl -at- BOSTECH -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 11:08:54 +0000

Dick Dimock said:

>No, I do not consider I.M. to be restricting. I can always
>break loose and *Create* if I want. And after a binge of
>*Create*, I find I have created a decently Mapped procedure.
>Info Mapping is just common sense, packaged and
>sold.

I think Dick's got a good point that is often overlooked. I've heard
many people argue against the Information Mapping format because they
feel it's too restrictive.

One important thing to remember is that Information Mapping isn't a
law. Once you've taken the training, you're free to modify the format
as needed to meet your needs. It's not like writing to MILSPECS where
a government auditing agency will come along later and hammer you if
you don't meet the specs. Nobody from Info Mapping is going to come
by later to check your work and penalize you if you're not in perfect
alignment with the format.

Sure, it's all copyright information...but that's not to control the
way you use it, it's so that if somebody like me decides to start
teaching the method without their permission, they can toss my
scrawny kiester into the hoosegow.*

Info Mapping isn't the perfect solution to every problem, and it
likely -should- be modified a bit from site to site, in order to meet
specific needs. But as Dick said, it's just common sense, packaged
and sold.

(*Non-slang translation: take any required legal action to stop me
from infringing on the copyright.)

Rick Lippincott
Boston Technology
Wakefield, MA
rjl -at- bostech -dot- com


Previous by Author: Request for Articles for IEEE
Next by Author: Re: Re[6]: Killer Language
Previous by Thread: New list - TechComm
Next by Thread: Job Opportunity: Rockville, MD


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads