RE: [humanmarkup-comment] modified HumanML taxonomy

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Hi,

What Len said.

To answer your question explicitly, yes. HumanMarkup has from the 
start been designed to be both modular and extensible and to change 
over time as our understandings change and evolve.

Ciao,
Rex

At 8:44 AM -0500 6/11/02, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>The reason we moved away from enumerations of this type
>in the primary (these are secondaries) was precisely
>because we found that the answer is arbitrary.  So
>we decided to create a toolkit approach for building
>such.  HumanML might as well be SemioticML or HumanSignML
>at the primary level.  What David has now is a secondary
>with no primary type references.  The toolkit approach is there
>such that emergence as exemplified by a human sitting
>down to contruct a sign system might exhibit.  That
>this is a "natural" activity is hard to debate.  It
>is a "human" and "intelligent" activity.
>
>len
>
>From: paul [mailto:beadmaster@ontologystream.com]
>
>Now one can ask about the origin of this list of about attributes. 
>Is the list complete in every way or are there some issues here and 
>there with one or more of the attributes?
>
>Who has decided on these and not some other attributes?  Can we add 
>or subtract to this list? 
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>


--