RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - locator

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

Here is an example of a data dictionary that has a 
geolocator system.

http://www.chin.gc.ca/Artefacts/RULA/e_sample.html

Consider that you might get to such a site and then 
have to identify the locations of artifacts according 
to a local coordinate grid whose root is a geolocator 
but the rest of the grid is some set of xy or other 
location names.  For example, when describing the 
positions of artifacts, geological strata are used 
to date the artifact (the lower the layer, the 
older the artifact).  This works ok until one begins 
to dig in caves where higher and lower quit having 
the same correlation.

We see in this sort of thing in 
public safety when one describes a road intersection, 
or some location relative to a named location.

If we are strictly sticking to our charter, a locator 
has to have an effect on human communication for it
to be in our scope.  I can make up some cases for that, 
but not today.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]

I don't have a problem with locators, and as I said, I am not 
suggesting deleting it. I just wanted to know what there is about it 
that is special to HumanML as opposed to the rest of the world or xml 
in general. I see your points, and I suspect that as we include it, 
it will eventually be included in some overall schema, perhaps the 
semiotics schema if such a thing comes about, or an ontological 
schema of basic concepts or constructs for an epistemological 
framework that clarifies how we describe general consensus reality.

Also, it occurs to me that we may need to narrow object down for this 
case so that it is clearly a sign for a physical object, not a 
computer network conceptual object.