Balancing Applicative and Structural Context

Before starting CompStrm, I had been working on an Ark for Norm which lacked deep structures, but which had extensive Applicative Context capabilities. So even without much structural context we could build up various contexts in which the roles operated.

In contrast, the CompStrm1 Wiki supports complex structural context, with no applicative context at present and only a very simple mechanism planned for release this weekend. Which is the better approach?

There's no question in my mind that when it comes to crafting a context, structural context is easy to use but simply incomplete. Structure implies more of a relationship than simply usage. (In this role I want to be able to refer to those roles, but there is no other relationship between those roles and this one.) So you need to add some explicit applicative context.

In converse, you can build any arbitrary context using an explicit applicative context--it is complete. But then, you are left doing all the heavy lifting. (It is explicit.) So I like the mix, with an emphasis on structural context.

My thought here is that perhaps the CompStrm1 Wiki will not need applicitive context mechanisms that were as powerful as I had previously implemented, and that the result will be more natural/intuitive. As I said to Norm last night, "using it will change the way you work."