[humanmarkup-comment]

[cognite@zianet.com]

Len quotes a manual suggesting that:

"Culture is a group's shared set of beliefs, values, and assumptions about
what's 
important. As a ... leader, you must be aware of cultural factors in three
contexts: 

o You must be sensitive to the different backgrounds of your people. 
o You must be aware of the culture of the ...[people]... in which your
organization is operating. 
o You must take into account your partner's customs and traditions" for
people to
work together, communicating well.

-- It would seem to call for focus of HumanML on CULTURAL characteristics.

Does the proposed Requirements document?


Could it be made to?


A sub-section could address the concern with application of HumanML markup for
COMMUNICATION, be it with purposes of diplomacy, business, personal,
artistic, or
other expression.

        Only a general pointer describing the nature of this focus might be
needed for the present document.
        Cultural features are oft outlined in anthropological works.  A good
outline,
keeping in mind the intended application of markup in computer and other
communication/work,
would seem to be a starting place for a beginning list of the type of things
in the
cultural domain that would be considered for HumanML markup.  There would be
things
like 
        Language, including [formality] Register
        Roles of interlocutor(s)-- in the discourse, in the community; incl.
audience
        Genre
        Purposiveness -- beit explicit, implicit, ...
        Style(s)
        Temporality -- Epoch, season, daytime, placement and connection, if
any, relative to                 contextual work/holidays, and clocktime
        Locale(s), at various grains of description ("zoom" levels)
        Frames of reference -- group(s) of people in various roles expected,
literary and
                oral traditions (including musical framing), ...
        Manner of delivery
        Media used

INTERPRETATION -- specifically, interpretation of the significance of the
communication -- would be what the markup is developed in aid of.  We are
assuming its XML encodings will be used in COMPUTER applications designed
for increasing precision in communication (per the stated a principia
agenda), even across interpretive contexts.

        Note that:  As party to the communication, the receiver's cultural
characteristics interact with those of the original communique ("document"
or anthropological "artifact" in some generalized sense).  There may be more
than one Locale, Temporality, ....
        Thus parsing applications using the XML markup may well entail
dealing with MULTIPLE sets of condition descriptors.  These computerized
interpreter-parsers would be unlike formal-language parsers, in that they
would have to deal with open dynamic systems.  They would be processor
programs that lace together multiple, changing sets of descriptive markup.
More specifically, the processors for some renderings might differ depending
on who and what was involved in the connection between originator and
receiver. (As a case in point, delivery media and receiving media may differ.)  
        Further note that a major consideration in this endeavor is
maintaining accuracy, with appropriate labeling of imputed content, as
opposed to literal/explicit and intended content of the
signal-within-context bundle itself.

SC
                                                copyright 3/2002
Dr. S. Candelaria de Ram