\sectiontitle{What is forkable?}

forkable was the name of choice for a working environment, a repository
collecting bits and pieces that should be exactly this:

           \begin{quotation}
           able to be forked.
           \end{quotation}

Starting point was the reflection about design that is capable 
to intend unintended use.
Open for \emph{reuse}, \emph{abuse}, \emph{appropiation}, 
adapting to anybody's special purposes, 
on special places, in special moments.

The attempt to meet everybody's requirements is difficult.
Trying to solve the paradoxon of intending unintended use 
often leads to an loss of stability, what can be nice, 
interesting or simply crash. Designing an open system while 
guaranteeing it's stability is a challenge.

       \begin{quotation}
        UNIX was not designed to stop its users from doing stupid things, 
        as that would also stop them from doing clever things.%
       \footnote{\cite{linfo:2010:unix}}
       \end{quotation}

As i am not an engineer, I tried to migrate this thought to 
visual design. Do i know what people want their world to be looking like, 
what it should be looking like? Or should they be allowed to distrust 
a claim for "one true way"?

      \begin{figure}[h]
       \graphic{i/a/workshop/bag/participants/christoph/i/non-free/v/comicsans.pdf}
       {20}{170}{310}{190}{\linewidth}
       {0pt}
      \end{figure}

As well in functional as in visual design it's easier and safer to draw a path
that others need to follow. 
But to be honest, I am not completly sure if I know the right path for 
everything. If you prevent people from doing dumb things you prevent them from 
doing smart things. While you are making things you \emph{need} to make 
decisions,  but need these decisions to be set in stone?
Shouldn't they be fluid enough to follow all different kinds of paths?

% anstatt regierungen, wirtschaftlichen m\"achten oder 
% geistigen instanzen zu vertrauen, sollten die menschen 
% das bed\"urfnis entwickeln, nach eigenen ideen zu leben, 
% eigene entw\"urfe zu machen, ihre durch eigene vorstellungen 
% bestimmten arbeiten zu verrichten, nach eigenen 
% konzepten zu verfahren.''
% \cite[p.11]{Aicher:1991:waw}

Instead of inventing the \emph{eierlegende Wollmilchsau},
being so superflexible that it becomes right for 
everybody, anywhere, anytime, 
i decided, it's best to KISS\footnote{keep it simple and stupid}.   

My solution at this time is multiplication.

If the design does not meet your requirements, take it, copy it,
make it better, make it worse, make it right for you, take over responsibilty,
fork it.

\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{First consequence}: \emph{be} forkable
\begin{itemize}
\item be readable, reusable%
      \footnote{%
        this refers mostly to fileformats
        and availability of source code
        }%
\item allow to be copied%
      \footnote{%
        this refers mostly to licensing
        }%
%--> FLOSS
\end{itemize}

\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Second consequence}: \emph{make sense} to be forked
\begin{itemize}
\item be modular%
\item be interconnective%
\end{itemize}

\medskip
\noindent
This approach does not aspire to be universal but forkable.

% \vfill
% \pagebreak[4]
% \clearpage
% \doublepage{i/a/workshop/bag/participants/christoph/i/non-free/v/comicsans.pdf}{2.0}{0}