[humanmarkup-comment] Why Markup Emotions In Communications

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

Kurt says: "Emotive states are very difficult to quantify save in their
effects, especially
since its not simply a matter of setting a position on a dial for the happy
emoticon. At the same time, it is worthwhile to consider "happy" from a VR
standpoint as being a labelled configuration consisting of specific actions"

When Rex pulled "wry" from the list, I was pleased because he quite
correctly 
analyzed the enumeration and identified a set error:  an interpretation
token 
was mixed in a list of observable tokens.   I like that because good 
classifying habits are emerging, the instinct for coherent set definition 
is vital.

We can say "he is happy" but to justify that interpretation, 
we need to identify some observable propertis from 
a set of observable tokens which as you say 
depends on an individual for interpretation.  
We could say also, a context.  We have created 
in the draft schema a set of abstract types to classify contexts (eg, 
chronemics, proxemics).   We have a set of concrete types of tokens (
physical characteristics) and action token types (eg, haptics). That 
can be useful to markup in a communication.

It is proposed that we may want to also define a light means to 
describe a process such that process types can be used to group 
exchanges of typed tokens.  From informal to highly formal configurations 
of such, one can then make statements about the expectations about 
the result of sending a token to a known observer in a known context 
thereby to test the commitment of the receiver to the token (aka, 
ontological commitment).

Process types and genre-ruled scripts are very similar if not 
isomorphic classes of things.  Saying "known observer" is similar 
if not isomorphic to a "viewpoint" or "role".   A process with a 
timeline (a chronemic at a scale of the process) maps features 
to meaningful token exchanges and this is very much like the 
mapping of the named features of a geographic location to the 
sets of geometric features that are used to render the real 
object in the machine.

This is a long winded way of saying I think we are making 
progress in our consensus on how to define HumanML itself, 
and to analyse the problems of human communications in a 
means that enables us to make that definition.  We need 
more practice with these to identify gaps.  We need 
use cases or scenarios to identify what a gap is.

len