With any adaptation comes conflict and contradiction. A change to an existing object may threaten to change its perception as a particular kind of thing, fundamentally altering the perception of what it is.
As I continue to evolve my definition of adaptability, I keep returning to the object as a fundamental element. Our recognition of an object as a type is based on what I will call its class integrity—the degree to which its attributes overlap with those of its object class. As an object adapts in form and shape, its semantic qualities must predominantly match those of its object class, in order for it to be continuously recognized as a particular type. There is a point at which an object may have adapted beyond its original semantic boundaries, altering the relationship to its class. This is what I will call a class shift. I find it important to note that category boundaries are never absolute—instead, I think of them more as fuzzy boundaries, permitting infinite permutations of objects. Furthermore, it is possible that a class shift does not simply move an object from class A to class B, but creates a new class C as a result, which lies somewhere in between the two former classes. In societal terms, object classes are negotiated by general consensus, and are never measurable—they are merely understood.
Beyond the definition of an object class—and entirely separate thereof—lies the integrity of an object, in itself. Equally unmeasurable, the “author” of an object may have a different interpretation of which attributes constitute its integrity than its owner, other stakeholders, or even those without any vested interest. More philosophical than categorical, the integrity of an object is the essential foundation of what it represents, its semantic core.
An internal protocol may both limit or direct its adaptation. It can ensure that an object remain within its class boundaries, or that it maintain its internal integrity, both in relation to or regardless of class. In contrast to the perception of both class and integrity, any protocol is not ambiguous, but specific—its role in relation to the adaptability an object is in creating an internal framework which allows for variance within clearly-defined boundaries.