Polymorphic Task Decomposition
A way of describing multiple manipulations of the same data so a capability model can choose the most appropriate route for the user’s circumstances. The pre-requisite for intrinsic accessibility: without PTD-style task variation, the adaptation system has nothing to adapt between.
What it is
Conventional task analysis names the task and its decomposition into steps. PTD names a task as the equivalence class of multiple realisations of the same underlying intention: direct manipulation versus modal dialogue, voice versus gesture, full-screen versus assistive overlay, keyboard versus pointer. Each realisation is a polymorph of the same underlying task.
The capability model — see Intrinsic Accessibility for the formal structure — selects from these polymorphs at runtime based on the user’s capacity, the device’s capabilities, and the operating context. Without PTD, the model has nothing to select from; with PTD, the underlying task is the invariant and the realisation is the variable.
Why it matters
The bolt-on assistive technology approach assumes a single canonical realisation of every task and grafts alternative input or output onto it. PTD assumes the opposite: that multiple realisations exist by design, and the system chooses among them. That choice is what makes the whole framework intrinsically accessible rather than functionally accessible.
Practical consequence: Paradise’s analysers borrow PTD’s vocabulary for “there are several valid ways to express this; pick one and check the choice is consistent.” The cross-file event-handler validation is exactly this — a click handler and a keyboard handler are two polymorphs of the same activation task, and the analyser checks they co-exist when both are needed.
Reading on
- The CISNA Model — the layered architecture inside which PTD-style alternatives are managed.
- Intrinsic Accessibility — the formal definition that PTD enables.