This one bothers me a lot, as it seems to have completely degenerated into an appendix (or worse, in text) brainstorm of little or no meaning or value. That is, for it to be there, and then to be marked wrongly because no-one was taught or teaches it right, or no-one any longer cares about it (for those reasons of no meaning or value).

I am going to completely re-work it, incorporating into that some steps I think will bring back the meaning, give it value and turn it into a tool that has its educational and practical value refreshed.

The first thing to recognise, I think, is this is not a theory, but a tool. It helps you do things, but it does not tell you how things are done. There is little point in chastising people for putting things in the wrong category, or even what is in a category, unless it is vague or ambiguous or technically incorrect (without evidence of how it might be). And it is not even something anyone should care about seeing, really, except as a part of making communicating a case more powerful – who cares, if they can do a great analysis without needing the tool?