Re: HM.interactions: initial questions: messaging

[Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga <rkthunga@humanmarkup.org>]

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark Brownell [mailto:gizmotron@earthlink.net]
>
> [...]
> > So would the semantic web function as a portal to a contextual data
> resource,
> > or would
> > this SOAP/HumanML data function as a portal to a selected part of the
> semantic
> > web?
>
> Both, depending on your scope. Without the SW framework, this knowledge
> interchange would be custom-made and extremely difficult to establish.
> But at the same time, this "service" will operate as a portal to this
> specific piece of information.
>
> [...]
> > So at this point
> > I find myself desiring to gain a greater understanding of XML/SOAP.
>
> Although SOAP and/or XML-RPC are very handy as "semi-protocols", I don't
> really find a reason to focus on them while building our framework; They
> are just a distributed computing "API". Essentially, it's just a way of
> messaging. Shouldn't we be neutral towards these?
>

Regarding SOAP:

The primary reason to investigate SOAP, or other Internet messaging
protocols,  as a means of sending messages is to make explicit the process
of channeling messages.  We are so far investigating the 'human' contextual
information _within_ a message itself, but also what is important is the
actual _conveyance_ or _delivery_ of the message.  For a deaf, an
emotionally distraught, for an intellectually underdeveloped person, for a
naive person, for a suave person, an auditory person--the messaging
considerations involved in routing and delivery are certainly worth making
explicit and embedding within our technology infrastructure.

That touches on what Len had mentioned earlier about our investigating the
'channels' of human communication.  I don't recall if it was you (Len) or
someone else who mentioned it or brought this point up, but the web services
directly correlate to how we could explicitly and functionally represent
channels through an XML infrastructure......it would be a data model for
reprenting how message packets could be developed which take into account
factors which could let an application appropriately route a message to the
appropriate person or target.

Since we are creating a methodology of dealing with the dynamic back and
forth state of human communications itself (not necessarily a set of data we
are storing away), we have to take into account how human information is
channeled.

Questions:
Reapproaching this topic again (it's been discussed during Phase 0)--what
other considerations do you think should 'messaging' should entail?

Would 'messaging' be considered a HumanMarkup 'Interaction' or a 'Domain'
(or both)?  We are still working out our nomenclature...

---------
Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga