Gather | Collaboration
The schema is designed to make it easy to delegate and collaborate in real-time. The schema is also extensible and easily updated. Continuing with examples outside of IT, imagine the challenge of creating a Domesday Book to audit England's assets a thousand years ago. The first step would be to come up with a schema for the information gathered. The common focus would be the control structure used to understand national product and gather taxes. This is a hierarchy from the king down through bishops, abbeys, town magistrates, barons and servants. All of the information gathered would revolve around this primary focus.
It is expected that the schema would change as information was gathered. For instance, there might have been a form of trade, pottery, for instance, that was unknown at the time the assessors were sent out. It should be easy to add this to the final book. This is also something that would be useful to other assessors. Imagine a message sent back by an assessor the first time he realizes that pottery needs to be accounted for, so that other assessors can ask the local magistrate if there are any potters in town.
I don't want to burden the conversation by holding too closely to the Domesday example, but it does illustrate some key ideas. Information is fed back in triple form:
town - has - potters ben - is - potter potter - might have - taxable revenue ben - yearly pots - 30 town - negotiated pot rate with Normandy - 10
Cruft Buster takes this information and automatically visualizes live, so if the assessors happened to have a mobile phone, they could see the model of revenue sources grow. They could also adjust their questions quickly to adapt to the evolving schema. This, folks, is why Cruft Buster can co-exist with agile modes of development.
Various parts of England were delegated to the assessors. With a closed-world assumption, the knowledge the assessors gathered would be more difficult to incorporate into the final book in a meaningful way. Consider the way the tree structures allow a new kind of revenue. If the primary focus is the controlling structure, then the potter's name would be stuck under the town magistrate, and under the potter's name would be other details about the production of pots. This doesn't break any other source of town revenue.