Re: The nomenclature process in other fields

[Dave Mann <damann@mitre.org>]

WARNING: This note may be diversionary.  I think the important
outstanding question for folks to consider is the questions
regarding the numbering scheme.  Still, since the topic came
up...

Russ wrote:
> We're certainly, I believe, in a rare situation of trying to enumerate
> before a taxonomy has been defined, let alone accepted. Such is the
> distinct nature of the items we're working with. Keeping this
> distinction in mind will help, I believe, to reduce the pressures some
> feel about the approaches we're considering. 

[setting my soapbox up on end and climbing on...]

While I think there is clearly a close relationship
between taxonomies and enumerations, I think that 
enumerations precede taxonomies.  I am no scientific
historian but what little reading I've done on the development
of taxomonies in other fields suggests to me that rich,
insightful taxonomies appear after, not before, a first
attempt at an enumeration is taken.

But then, once classification and categorization advances
take place, it may force the community to reevaluate and 
change the original enumeration (e.g., consider the history
of the periodic table of the elements).  If my understanding of
the history is correct (and it may not be) and if history
is predictive of these things interact, I personally would
not be surprised if the CVE that we see in, say, 5 or 10
years may look very different than what ever we create
now.  This is assuming that the needed work on taxonomies
feeds back into the enumeration process.


Dave




-- 



=========================================================
David Mann                     ||  phone: (781) 271 - 2252
INFOSEC Engineer/Scientist, Sr || 
Enterprise Security Solutions  ||    fax: (781) 271 - 3957
The MITRE Corporation          ||
Bedford, Mass 01730            || e-mail: damann@mitre.org