Manifesto and principles

What makes knowledge understandable

We save documents, decisions and results. Yet what makes them understandable often lies between them: a reference, a challenge, experience from another place or evidence that arrives much later.

Intertween wants to make these connections traceable. We begin with what people and organisations have observed, described and done. From there, we investigate how knowledge finds new contexts and what we can learn together.

Shared memory needs both continuity and reassessment. We should be able to understand what we knew then, what has changed and why an assessment needs review.

This requires respect for the individual, recognition of contributions and inspectable responsibility. Organisations need to cooperate while remaining responsible for their sources and the conditions governing them.

Following and paying attention

Bruno Latour’s call to follow the actors inspires us to investigate concrete associations. In Intertween, we begin with Knowledge Objects and follow their references to sources, people, organisations and actions. We also follow challenges and uncertainty. Following Knowledge Objects is our application of this inspiration.

The Japanese concept of Ma (間) inspires attention to meaningful intervals: between sources, perspectives and events over time. For Intertween, this informs how we investigate and listen. A new question may emerge there. By returning to it, we can learn together.

Inspiration and further reading: Bruno Latour, Reassembling the Social (2005) · JAPAN HOUSE Los Angeles, A Perspective on the Japanese Concept of Ma (2020). Ma is used here as philosophical inspiration, not as the name of a technical component.

Five principles guiding the work

1. 01

   We learn together through connections and over time

   No person, organisation or technology has the whole picture. We follow Knowledge Objects, examine their connections and return to questions as new evidence arrives. Disagreement and uncertainty need to remain visible. The We, Not the Me expresses our commitment to this shared learning.

2. 02

   Shared memory with respect for the individual

   Experience and methods should remain useful without remembering everything about everyone. Personal information, attribution and relationships need decisions about purpose, visibility and retention. Preserving a contribution does not mean making every detail about its contributor available.

3. 03

   Independent sources, traceable responsibility

   Organisations remain responsible for their sources, infrastructure and access decisions. Cooperation should rest on agreed descriptions and permitted exchanges. An assessment’s evidence, responsible parties and changes should remain traceable. Accountability evidence may need protection.

4. 04

   Contributions and rights stay connected to knowledge

   Investigating, reviewing, translating and improving all contribute knowledge. Contributions should remain traceable and recognised in ways that respect rights and protection needs. Recognition may refer to a person, organisation, role or protected reference. Withholding a name does not cancel valid rights or claims.

5. 05

   Participants shape reciprocity

   Contributors and users should be able to shape voluntary rules for recognition, sharing experience and common benefit. We want to investigate how value can benefit more people. People should not be valued by their position in a graph, and rights should not automatically transfer to a shared pool.

The principles guide development; they do not guarantee completed capabilities. Federated exchange, protected attribution and governance of conditions over time need implementation, testing and review in real settings.

Independence and responsibility

Each organisation remains responsible for its sources, infrastructure and access decisions. When a question crosses organisations, someone needs to take it forward without taking over the others’ source material.

• The source retains authority over provenance and stewardship; its claims can still be challenged.
• An observation is not the truth; uncertainty must be visible.
• Changes must remain open to inspection.
• A question spanning responsibilities needs a place and someone accountable for it.

Governance and responsibility ↗ · The proposed architecture ↗