> If human would not know what style of window do you want then he would ask or assume something and allowed for your comments. "Programming" humans is much more conversational. Your workers know what to assume and when to ask.
Whenever I think about how programming should work, I think about the interactions Star Trek characters have with the Holodeck in its design mode. For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SI0wqTsIq3Q#t=3m40s (Star Trek TNG, "Schism") — a conversation of iterated constraint-satisfaction through property alteration and library retrieval.
What you get, in these cases, is entirely dependent on the amount of context-sensitive and "common sense" knowledge the Holodeck has access to. The Enterprise on TNG was able to create a sentient being, Moriarty, from a single command, because it had access to a huge database of information about human behavior, game theory, psychology, etc. and also the complete texts of the Sherlock Holmes novels to constraint-match against.
However, Dr. Zimmerman, the programmer responsible for Voyager's EMH program, had to spend years making intricately-detailed assertions about each aspect of EMH operation—because, I imagine, the default human behaviors were no good in a medical context. Given the show's base of theory, this should have been able to be short-circuited by constraint-satisfying against a large database of holographic recordings of the performance of medical procedures, similar to the Sherlock Holmes corpus. The rest (prescribing medicine, etc.) would simply be a "friendly bedside manner" on top of the already-helpful expert system built into the computer (and it is a chronic question of why the ship as a whole doesn't just come with such a "personality subroutine" already installed—probably simply because of the show's chronic bio-centricity.)
Whenever I think about how programming should work, I think about the interactions Star Trek characters have with the Holodeck in its design mode. For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SI0wqTsIq3Q#t=3m40s (Star Trek TNG, "Schism") — a conversation of iterated constraint-satisfaction through property alteration and library retrieval.
What you get, in these cases, is entirely dependent on the amount of context-sensitive and "common sense" knowledge the Holodeck has access to. The Enterprise on TNG was able to create a sentient being, Moriarty, from a single command, because it had access to a huge database of information about human behavior, game theory, psychology, etc. and also the complete texts of the Sherlock Holmes novels to constraint-match against.
However, Dr. Zimmerman, the programmer responsible for Voyager's EMH program, had to spend years making intricately-detailed assertions about each aspect of EMH operation—because, I imagine, the default human behaviors were no good in a medical context. Given the show's base of theory, this should have been able to be short-circuited by constraint-satisfying against a large database of holographic recordings of the performance of medical procedures, similar to the Sherlock Holmes corpus. The rest (prescribing medicine, etc.) would simply be a "friendly bedside manner" on top of the already-helpful expert system built into the computer (and it is a chronic question of why the ship as a whole doesn't just come with such a "personality subroutine" already installed—probably simply because of the show's chronic bio-centricity.)