Re: Symbols, Signs and Signals

[Kurt Cagle <kurt@kurtcagle.net>]

I'm inclined to agree. Do you have a model for process associations that
you're thinking about here, or is this something we will need to develop ad
hoc?

-- Kurt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>; "OASIS Comment"
<humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: Symbols, Signs and Signals


Definitely a good idea. Especially process association. Gotta do some
thinking.

Ciao,
Rex

At 3:01 PM -0500 10/2/01, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>In a noodling mood...
>
>We need some thoughts on using our current schema.  We have
>discussed the use of physical properties in processes such as
>identification.  Identification is a process used to establish
>for the sake of another process, a quantifiable identity property.
>
>I am considering our semiotic categories for symbols, signs, and
>signals and how they would be used in a given process.
>A process model has a lot of advantages and are well known
>in communications theory and real time contol.  Whereas many
>use object models these days, process models have some advantages
>of not being quite as abstract, but suitably abstract, and
>applicable to many kinds of human communications both formal
>and informal.   They would serve as a means to organize
>the our other categories into a flow (to orchestrate so
>to speak) can are suitable to emergent systems in that
>process/control models separate the controls and controls
>are the token of emergence.
>
>A lot of the work that would make HumanML useful is the assembly
>of what are sometimes called code lists.  In effect, these are
>enumerations but with an added description for interpretation.
>We have lists of these per Joe's work and that is as good a
>place to start if any if we can fill in more detail such as
>descriptive information.
>
>It seems we need:
>
>1.  The emotion plus description.
>2.  Symbol sets that can be used to represent it.
>3.  A means to associate expressions of emotions to
>     their symbolic representations or gestures.
>
>Our categories in the schemas are weak but I don't know
>how to tighten them up without examples so we should start
>somewhere.  The emoticons seem like a low hanging fruit.
>
>When a symbol, signal, sign or message type is added, we
>additionally should be able to associate to process types
>in which it is likely to occur.  A process would be defined
>pretty much as the original systems theory texts define it
>and as used in real time control systems.   This is a very
>basic model of inputs, outputs with associated control
>specifications.  A process can nest.
>
>Symbols, signals, and signs may have a culture associated
>with them particularly symbols.  Culture is in one sense,
>the old environment model, but it accounts for history,
>yet is not confined to location since culture is carried
>as an aspect of community.
>
>This is a lot of stuff.
>
>It seems trivial, but what if we mapped the known emoticons,
>eg, what Miriam had on her list as a symbol set of XML Schema
>simpleTypes using regexes?  We can make up a culture, say,
>webHeads or something of the sort and fill in as much detail
>as we can.  We don't have to be hindered by political correctness
>in this, so for an exploratory example, it is ideal.
>
>len
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>


--
Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email: rexb@starbourne.com
Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request

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