Context : OnModularity
Any system can be thought of as decomposed into modules. HerbertSimon thinks there are an alternative number of natural or good ways of decomposing a system into modules. Typically modules have strong internal connections (cohesion) but weaker and stereotypical external connections (coupling)
When you design or maintain a system, you are likely to conceive of it, and approach it as a set of modules. However if you draw the boundaries is the wrong place, you are making a modularity mistake
- TheCityAsInformationSystem (for modularity mistakes in urbanism)
- SpaceAndModularizingWebPages / DecompositionByLanguageIsProbablyAModularityMistake (decomposing web-sites by space vs by language-type)
- Wild thought. Could some economies suffer because the notion of property draws the boundaries around property in the wrong place? PropertyModules
- Getting the wrong granularity is a kind of modularity mistake. But let's give it it's own page GranularityMistake
What's wrong with a modularity mistake?
Makes communication between the parts difficult / expensive as often module boundaries are harder to cross than internal communication. In the paper linked from HighDensityLiving, urban modularity mistakes translate into higher transport cost and pollution.
See also :
- SubsumptionArchitecture (for a challange to traditional functional decomposition in robot design)
Backlinks (23 items)