RE: HM.VR_AI: Updated

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

Only the real time control systems such as Hatley Pirbhai or the IDEF models, etc.   It is not difficult to use

measurement types for scale.   Feedback systems can also feed forward.  Proxemics

as currently thought of only include concepts of personal space that then have to

be mapped to a measurement system.  Therefore, it works like a a mapping system

for geolocation.  The GML should suffice for 2D systems, but perhaps not 3D.  That is an issue

we will need to work.

 

Chronemics again, I think this is a code list layer for personal

interaction with real space coordinate references.  Not difficult except in the

tedium of creating the code lists per the possible contexts delimited by the

schema abstract types (eg, culture, locale, perception of time based on stress loading, etc). 

 

Process models are abstract event driven control systems and while one can consider them

sequential, that is an error.   In effect, they can be a way to create an abstraction

of a communication protocol with nested or recursive modeling that then maps

to a process hierarchy.    Again, nothing new here.  Most of this

conceptually is outside the VR rendering system, so the availability of data to the simulation

isn't a problem AFAIK.

 

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Nixon [mailto:robnixon@execpc.com]

>Also note that both chronemics and proxemics have scale issues.

Yes, I agree that there are scale issues related to chronemics and proxemics.

LEN> Personal real time and historical time have their analogues...

Are you aware of any modeling languages that have addressed the personal vs. the historic time aspects?