RE: HM.Requirement: authority (Re: Case in Point-cultural Module:IslamicFundamentalism?)

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

And to understand viewpoint, one must understand it changes 
with respect to distance from that which is viewed.  Viewpoint 
has dimensions and the schema attempts to capture these such 
that the principles of focus can be brought to bear.  A 
ball of twine is a point from a distance, a sphere from a 
distance, a cylinder from a distance and viewed on end, a 
filled circle and a point.   The trick is to understand 
it as a pattern.   This is what Prueitt is pointing out.
 
The pattern directs cells of process.  He calls them 
process compartments and while referred to using other 
terms in earlier works, that is good enough.  The notion 
of orchestration is useful because it takes in the 
idea of addressable process types on a timeline with 
some variation possible given stylistic conventions. 

Schemas are patterns, can be dynamically adjusting 
by stylistic convention, and are directable using 
well-configured processes.  One of the processes is 
identification of source and type.

Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt Cagle [mailto:kurt@kurtcagle.net]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:30 AM
To: Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
Cc: slbain@netobjectives.com; humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: HM.Requirement: authority (Re: Case in Point-cultural
Module:IslamicFundamentalism?)


This is an incredibly good idea. Schemas by definition impose a viewpoint;
as I point out in most of my XML classes:

**********************************************
You cannot understand the fundamentals of schemas without appreciating the
fact that all schemas are intrinsically political, not technical. If you
have three departments that each have a need for a personalization schema,
then each department will have its own priorities and interests for that
schema. In that regard a schema is in effect a social contract, an agreement
between all parties about the domain of the schema, the terminology used,
the relationships (and relative priority) of elements within the schema.
**********************************************
I suspect that within a decade, schemas will likely end up becoming an
integral part of all civil legal processes - are you trying to build a
building? Then you agree to use architectural schema
http://www.archstandards.gov/schemata/bld1254a6 and permit process schema
http://www.archstandards.gov/schemata/prmt2399ds . These become part of the
legal records, and are kept as part of an online repository.

As I see it, a significant part of what the HumanML group itself is trying
to do is to create a set of schemas that attempt with some modicum of
fidelity to model aspects of human behavior and interaction. This is of
course not fully possible, precisely because in the creation of such schemas
we do create a bias, but if we can recognize that from the outset and
attempt to mitigate the bias (or introduce some mechanism that makes it
possible to change the bias while still maintaining fidelity to the
standard) then I think we can go a long way toward building a more universal
schema.

-- Kurt

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga" <rkthunga@humanmarkup.org>
To: <humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:27 AM
Subject: HM.Requirement: authority (Re: Case in Point-cultural
Module:IslamicFundamentalism?)


>
>
>
> >
> > A way to do that is to design the markup
> > and other data modules such that it is apparent
> > on inspection what information is to be gathered.
> > Resist the temptation to order the world of
> > others.  They have the right to their anarchy
> > and we can only provide tools for those with the
> > will to be understood to work out an understanding.
> >
>
> That is a very important point, and fundamental to our design.  Thus...
>
> HM.Requirements
> =================
>
> "The frameworks/modules we make explicit will of SHOULD take into account
> the authority(ies) who lead to their created" ( whether it be the musings
on
> this discussion forum, representative of the individuals responsible for
> certain actions, or representative of the large organizations directly. )
>
> Points of contention of course will exist between the different
> perspectives.  Yet, we will not be choosing/debating/deciding on these
> structures.  The differences can be made explicit, and if necessary,
> accessible through alternate namespaces.
>
>    We would have:
>      Culture
>       Arab -- Ranjeeth Perspective
>       Arab -- Palestinian Perspective
>       Arab -- US/NewYork Perspective
>
> The differences between them can be mapped, transformed, made explicit and
> clear...within a framework, and between frameworks.  Again, there is no
> limit to how many 'perspectives' are possible. Our job is at this stage to
> provide a unique and explicit meeting ground for them through XML
> infrastructure.
>
> Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
>
>
> Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
>
>
>
>
> that is as accurate as possible. There are at
> > least three major considerations in this effort that I can recognize
> > at the moment.
> >
> > 1. To get accurate information requires at the least more than one
> > active member of this broad cultural group, hopefully from more than
> > one of the following sub-groups: national, schismatic, and ethnic
> > that produce and harbor such humans. That includes but is not limited
> > to, Shiites, Sunnis, Arabs, Lenbanese, Persians, Balkans, Slavs,
> > Greeks Palestinians, Jordanians, Saudis, Yemenis,  Morrocans,
> > Algerians, Tunisians, Libyans, Egyptians, Iranians, Indians,
> > Turkmenistanis, Uzbekhistantis, Azerbaijanis,  Afghanis, Pakhistanis,
> > Gulf State nationals and more.
> >
> > Does anyone believe these humans do NOT want to be heard and
> > understood on their own terms?
> >
> > 2. For this, or any,  culturalModule:  we need a way to be perceived
> > in our work as being, at the least, without ulterior motives or
> > hidden agendas. We need to be perceived as unbiased, as setting our
> > standards and goals at absolute unvarnished truth while acknowledging
> > that such is not feasible or actually possible in totality.
> >
> > How our information can be used needs to be understood so that those
> > who might be mistrustful understand that what we are doing is
> > providing them with a way to be understood correctly, and thus to
> > control how THEY are perceived. We need them to understand that this
> > gives them a way to have some measure of control over how THEY can be
> > used or misused, and how they can use this information to correct
> > misuse or abuse or misinformation.
> >
> > 3. We must eliminate emotional connotations from coloring how such a
> > culturalModule: is constructed.
> >
> > No mean feat.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> >
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>