Ok, but how does that invalidate the methodology of the matrix? Finding one or multiple counterexample(s) to the 'natural progression' that is a fundamental part of the matrix doesn't mean it 'doesn't work so well'. The examples are not important, the point is to identify various orthogonal paths of natural progression, each of which is of relevance to a skilled programmer, and to give someone who is making an assessment of the skill level of a specific person handles for what areas to look in.
I'm still not sure of your argument; if you've heard of the higher level concept but don't know the fundamentals, that obviously still says something about your skill level and drives as a software engineer. It's kinda useless to try to list what exactly it could mean in this concrete example, the point is that the model allows systematic evaluation of skills.
I'm still not sure of your argument; if you've heard of the higher level concept but don't know the fundamentals, that obviously still says something about your skill level and drives as a software engineer. It's kinda useless to try to list what exactly it could mean in this concrete example, the point is that the model allows systematic evaluation of skills.