[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [humanmarkup-comment]
Len quotes a manual suggesting that: "Culture is a group's shared set of beliefs, values, and assumptions about what's important. As a ... leader, you must be aware of cultural factors in three contexts: o You must be sensitive to the different backgrounds of your people. o You must be aware of the culture of the ...[people]... in which your organization is operating. o You must take into account your partner's customs and traditions" for people to work together, communicating well. -- It would seem to call for focus of HumanML on CULTURAL characteristics. Does the proposed Requirements document? Could it be made to? A sub-section could address the concern with application of HumanML markup for COMMUNICATION, be it with purposes of diplomacy, business, personal, artistic, or other expression. Only a general pointer describing the nature of this focus might be needed for the present document. Cultural features are oft outlined in anthropological works. A good outline, keeping in mind the intended application of markup in computer and other communication/work, would seem to be a starting place for a beginning list of the type of things in the cultural domain that would be considered for HumanML markup. There would be things like Language, including [formality] Register Roles of interlocutor(s)-- in the discourse, in the community; incl. audience Genre Purposiveness -- beit explicit, implicit, ... Style(s) Temporality -- Epoch, season, daytime, placement and connection, if any, relative to contextual work/holidays, and clocktime Locale(s), at various grains of description ("zoom" levels) Frames of reference -- group(s) of people in various roles expected, literary and oral traditions (including musical framing), ... Manner of delivery Media used INTERPRETATION -- specifically, interpretation of the significance of the communication -- would be what the markup is developed in aid of. We are assuming its XML encodings will be used in COMPUTER applications designed for increasing precision in communication (per the stated a principia agenda), even across interpretive contexts. Note that: As party to the communication, the receiver's cultural characteristics interact with those of the original communique ("document" or anthropological "artifact" in some generalized sense). There may be more than one Locale, Temporality, .... Thus parsing applications using the XML markup may well entail dealing with MULTIPLE sets of condition descriptors. These computerized interpreter-parsers would be unlike formal-language parsers, in that they would have to deal with open dynamic systems. They would be processor programs that lace together multiple, changing sets of descriptive markup. More specifically, the processors for some renderings might differ depending on who and what was involved in the connection between originator and receiver. (As a case in point, delivery media and receiving media may differ.) Further note that a major consideration in this endeavor is maintaining accuracy, with appropriate labeling of imputed content, as opposed to literal/explicit and intended content of the signal-within-context bundle itself. SC copyright 3/2002 Dr. S. Candelaria de Ram
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC