RE: HM.applications-Translations

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

I need to understand

"Each document that is loaded has the option to declare search terms."

which sounds a lot like an inverted index using what the hytimers 
called an fcsloc (a numerical location in a coordinate system, sometimes 
built up by a map from a byte offset).  A numerical system is not 
heresy to a markup expert, but it may be to some XMLers who are a 
bit uninformed.  XML shouldn't care.

This

<foo foo>anything</foo foo>

should return an illegal character violation.  It is not well-formed XML 
unless the name production allows whitespace.

In a later mail, you mention the meaningfulness of the author in the 
context of a greater field.   Precisely.  Understand this is why 
the topic map experts always state a topic map is an "opinion".  

Of great concern to expert system developers (what a closed world 
model was OUAT), is the issue of authority and legitimacy.   For 
example, your tool was running in the topic of the gestalt theory. 
There can be variants of that theory and as a result, one finds 
oneself having to adopt the view of a school of that topic.  I 
use the view term deliberately.   Hermaneuticists and semioticians 
are very careful to state that text analysis depends on a point 
of view.  It isn't meaningful unless that is accepted.  Once 
accepted, it is as meaningful as relevant or useful.  If that 
sounds like politics, it is.  The semantic web is simply a 
means to remove choices of representation to enable one to 
discover like and divergent political assertions.  In simplest 
terms, the choice of the choosers.  All *meaning* is systemic.

The semantic web as a service is useful.  As an authority, it 
is dangerous.  It becomes a golem.

One idea of HumanML is to encode cultural systems such that 
the choice of the golem is in a context relevant to that 
culture.  This might be considered input to a deontic logic 
system.   As an expert system, the SW architecture is unremarkable. 
However, at scale, it can do very serious damage.  For that 
reason, the power of the Golem to make decisions over some 
domains is restricted or completely unavailable.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Brownell [mailto:gizmotron@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 4:12 PM
To: Bullard, Claude L (Len); humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: HM.applications-Translations


Hi Len,

> 
> It is good code.  It installed, it ran, and when 
> I selected the pre-selected terms, it returned 
> article abstracts.  How extensible are the search 
> terms, who extends them, and so on?
> 

Each document that is loaded has the option to declare search terms. The 
sub-browser displays them in the search Items list. So this process is up to

the author to present. That is why a set of search terms loaded in the first

document of a semantic portal would facilitate the meaningfulness of the
author 
or group presenting that portal. This is going to tell you allot about my
knowledge, 
I guess, of XML. What do you mean here, "How extensible are the search
terms."


> It appears to be annotative and that is essentially 
> a hermaneutic tool.  That is useful but so is a 
> a help file indexing tool relying on an inverted index 
> based on term occurrences the writer annotates.  
> 

The sub-browser is a document query system based on the numerical location 
in that document, or in a MTML object, of the text being parsed. This occurs

at the moment that the human user selects fragments that match these search 
terms mentioned earlier. MTML is the markup device, the sub-browser is 
basically a tool that gathers information for display purposes. Now RDF is a

markup that can have the same searchable indexing capabilities that you 
mentioned above. That is what I'm working on right now.

> What functions make it more than that?  In other words, what did I miss?

This generic tool has no DBMS function to it. So you definitely missed that.
I pulled 
back from my earlier experiments to this single function tool in this form.
The old 
stuff had XML transformation capabilities, slideshow with sound auto feed
abilities, 
image presentation, and video presentation abilities. I just felt that in
the process 
of starting over from scratch, to add speed to it, I would just work on one
single 
idea at a time.

> 
> BTW, just curious:  
> 
> 1.  Why did you use Shockwave for building the component? 

Because I wanted to enhance HTML in HTML's own user environment. XML 
seams to be best delivered as a HTML document in its final viewer form in a
browser. 
I felt that an enhancement to HTML or XHTML would not conflict with the
goals of
XML development. In fact XML could be used to deliver some very interesting
MTML 
enhanced HTML.

> 
> 2.  Do element instances such as 
> 
>          <less hyperbolic> less hyperbolic </less hyperbolic> 
> 
>     parse as well-formed XML?
> 

They can if the document has a single root level to it and the author makes
the 
document well-formed. The document can also work well in the sub-browser if 
element tags are not well-formed. This is a numerical based system that
works 
without a hierarchy. That is almost blasphemy to a XML coder. HTML in a
browser 
such as IE or NN is not much more than an over glorified fax machine. I was
trying 
to give power to the machine using the documents that it downloads. Much of
the 
user's machine is just sitting there waiting for the next document to
render. Server 
side CGI and java applets have made it a better information tool, but not
much.