Solving the problem can be broken into the application of a succession of constraints with associated hypotheses. Different kinds of excess complexity arising from different kinds of sub- optimum design seem sufficiently independent that relatively simple considerations are adequate to show how the minimization imposes the succession of constraints. The data objects are modular, in the sense that they connect only to each other, not to any embedding space or storage space. The only features of a data object are a finite number of connections to data objects. The data objects are asymmetrical in their connections.
All objects have the same potential connection types.
Combining them simplifies the language and does no harm. The above four hypotheses are largely common sense and their correctness strongly supports the existence of some optimum data object structure for rich applications and it can be characterized in terms of the kinds of interconnection between the objects. The connections allow all the objects which comprise a data state to be located in an hierarchy. A data object will have connections to immediate neighbors in the hierarchy and at most one other object. Reducing remote connections to one, has no effect on the existence of neighbors in the hierarchy or the need for connections to them.