Re: Diagramming trust - another take

[Francis McCabe <frankmccabe@mac.com>]

A goal is not so easily identified with real world effects. Goals are  
predicates, and the way it was originally defined aligned better with  
predicates.

On Apr 5, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Ken Laskey wrote:

>>
>
> After another long talk with Dave Ellis, I am again inspired to try  
> to express some ideas, and this time I come with definitions and  
> diagrams.
>
> Goal: a desired set of real world effects
>
> Goal may be that the real world effects are realized, avoided, or  
> some combination.
>
> Constraint: a specified set of real world effects that an actor is
>  (1) limited from pursuing or being responsible for indirectly  
> causing, or
>  (2) responsible for pursuing

This is too specific a definition for such a general term. If we end  
up defining this concept it should be with a qualified name.

>
> Ownership Boundary: the extent of an identifiable set of actors  
> sharing a common set of goals and constraints, and other common  
> entities through which the goals and constraints can be expressed.

This seems to be unrelated to ownership. An ownership boundary is very  
simply the boundary of the entity that may be said to own something.  
It may be a single individual or a corporation. Has nothing to do with  
goals.


>
> A given actor may reside within one or more ownership boundaries.   
> There may be agreed upon protocols for interactions that cross  
> ownership boundaries or an actor crossing an ownership boundary may  
> independently need to resolve any mismatches.
>
> Reputation: a property of a given actor assigned by other actors  
> based on the accumulated experience experience of the other actors  
> on the extent to which real world effects resulting from interaction  
> with the given actor are assessed as desirable, neutral, or  
> undesirable.
>

I would prefer something like:

A social fact that expresses the collective trust of a group of actors  
in another actor.


> Other definitions are needed but I was concentrating on the diagrams  
> that follow.
>
> <Class_Diagram__Ownership_boundary.jpg>
>
> An Actor has goals and constraints based on the Ownership Boundary  
> in which it resides.  This Actor can be influenced or constrained by  
> other actors who have their own goals and constraints, where the  
> actors providing influence or constraints may be peers,  
> subordinates, or superiors.  The influencing actor is often a  
> superior.
>
> <Class_Diagram__Goal_&_Constraint.jpg>
>
> <Class_Diagram__Reputation.jpg>
>
> A later diagram also includes evidence, and these will need to be  
> merged or made consistent.
>
> <Class_Diagram__Trusting_&_Trusted.jpg>
>
> Note when there is no direct interaction, the Trusted Actor knows  
> nothing of the Trusting Actor and acts strictly in concert with its  
> goals. The Trusting Actor has an interest in some possibly resulting  
> real world effects but no interaction with the Trusted Actor.
>
> <Class_Diagram__Trust_and_Risk.jpg>
>
> The following sequence diagrams are rough but demonstrate how the  
> relationships should in the class diagrams are realized.
> < 
> Sequence_Diagram__Trust_w__interaction__Trust_w__interaction__Trust_w__interaction 
> .jpg>
>
> < 
> Sequence_Diagram__Trust_w_o_interaction__Trust_w_o_interaction__Trust_w_o_interaction 
> .jpg>
>
> message 6 should have been deleted
> < 
> Sequence_Diagram__Trust_ 
> &_Risk_w__interaction__Trust_ 
> &_Risk_w__interaction__Trust_&_Risk_w__interaction.jpg>
>
> < 
> Sequence_Diagram__Trust_w_o_interaction__Trust_ 
> &_Risk_w_o_interaction__Trust_&_Risk_w_o_interaction.jpg>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ken Laskey
> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305      phone: 703-983-7934
> 7515 Colshire Drive                         fax:       703-983-1379
> McLean VA 22102-7508
>
>
>
>
>

smime.p7s