[humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Updated Draft ofRequirementsDocument

[cognite@zianet.com]

$$$$$$$$$$$$  This might be worth adding:

The HumanML Human Markup comes about in aid of fomenting accurate
communication, for which CULTURAL characterizations will be included, 
at an abstract level in Primary and more concretely in Secondary Schemas.

The culture-characterization portion of Primary HumanML markup purports to
describe types of cultural features; Secondary schemas expand them in
characterizing particular cultures.
Cultural characterization that bears on communication will be emphasized.

(Do I have the "will" right, or should it be "should"?)

$$$$$$$  THE RATIONALE FOLLOWS.  

This suggestion arises from pondering the exchange between Rex and Ranjeeth,
where Rex says:

>Here are my replies. This is good debate. I hope more people jump in 

Specifically:
At 07:02 PM 18-03-2002 GMT, you wrote:
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 09:51:34 -0800
>From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
>Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Updated Draft of
> RequirementsDocument
>To: rkthunga@humanmarkup.org
>Cc: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
>Message-id: <a05100301b8bbd1d85d22@[192.168.123.136]>
>At 10:22 AM -0500 3/18/02, Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga wrote:
>>comments in angle bracket <me> tags:

Rex:
>>This document specifies goals, requirements, and usage scenarios for 
>>the various levels of the Human  Markup Language: HumanML Schemas
...

======= INTERPRETATION of the above:  We are working to document goals of
the markup
conventions, which have various descriptive levels, to be specified.

=============> According to the discussion excerpted just below:
         A basic of what HumanML is to be for is the description
of Human endeavors "to understand ourselves and our place in the universe",
i.e., HumanML is to help characterize what people/agents are doing and 
explaining to each other.  

>>
>>"Human"
>>
>>When enclosed in double quote marks, as above, it is used as a name 
>>for what the HumanMarkup Initiative aims to encapsulate into 
>>HumanML. Used thus, this term transcends reference to any single 
>>biological entity or to the collective biological species of Homos 
>>Sapiens, and is inclusive of all self- to species-conscious effort 
>>throughout our history to understand ourselves and our place in the 
>>universe.
>>
Ranjeeth says:
>><me>"This term refers to any anthopormorphic biological entity", 
>>would be a more parsimonious description,

"anthropomorphic biological entity" is flexible.
qualification. What happens to an AI agent that I want to give 
>"Human" abilities and rights/perogatives to? What is religion if not 
>a "Human" activity?

=========== STRUCTURE OF THE MULTILEVEL MARKUP SYSTEM
is another issue under discussion:

Ranjeeth says:
>>><me> HumanML Secondary schemata "should" be extensible enough so 
>>>that developers can represent the human traits and characteristics 
>>>they choose to represent</me>


Rex:
>>>----------------
>>>MODULARITY
>>>----------------
>>>HumanML will be organized into a Primary Base Human Markup Schema 
>>>and Secondary Human Markup Schemata.
>>>
>>>
>>>The HumanML Primary Base Human Markup Schema "must" include a 
>>>HumanIdentity Element that is compatible with and interoperable 
>>>with the most widely accepted standards available.
>>>
>>>The HumanML Primary Base Human Markup Schema Human "must" include 
>>>or add the necessary Elements and Attributes required to build the 
>>>Secondary Human Markup Schemata.

========SC
The document says there are multiple levels; presumably Primary and
Secondary are the upper levels?  Assuming that, then what is their relation to
each other?

The third excerpt just above seems to imply that the Primary is to be a
union of all Secondary labels.  But then it would change with every
implementation.  That would be inefficient.  But if, instead of in extenso
inclusion, Primary is more ABSTRACT
than Secondary.  It would be like a Class, with mixin attributes to further
specify 
Secondary cases?  Then Primary is more INCLUSIVE than Secondary, which is more 
SPECIFIC and describes DETAIL.

The next question is, What sort of detail is Secondary describing?

========/SC

>>>
>>>The HumanML Secondary Human Markup Schemata will include a Virtual 
>>>Reality and Aritificial Intelligence Schema.

>>>
>>>The HumanML Secondary Human Markup Schemata will include a Human 
>>>Physical Characteristics Description Markup Language Schema.

============== SC

Two disparate kinds of Secondaries are mentioned:
	- The VR and AI are implementation technique domains; 
	- descriptors of realworld observables are of a different nature: empiricals.

As for realworld observables relevant to communication, mention of
cultural characteristics is a major omission here.  They are probably
realworld observables, but not as simple as height, say.  More abstract.

Cultural characteristics like language, genre and role of interlocutors 
directly affect the content of communications.  This is true in geolocal
communication, and especially true in the context of electronic communication 
for which HumanML is being designed.  (In contrast, in this "disembodied"
communication, where interlocutors are in different places and/or times, the 
looks of surroundings and interlocutors are less germane.  Then cultural 
info clearly belongs to HumanML, and would presumably be more central to this
markup than description of Physical interlocutor and surround characteristics.

But do cultural descriptors belong under Primary or under Secondary?  

        o  In general, there will be many schemas of cultures, for there are
many
cultures.  
        o  Yet there may be thematic meta-features 
that would belong in a class describing all or most cultures.  (Again this
is assuming that Primary is an abstraction rather than an in extenso
collection of attributes.)  

The conclusion, then, is that culture specifications belong under BOTH
Primary and Secondary types.

With this rationale, we would be led to add something like the following
to the Requirements document for HumanML:

$$$$$$$$$$$$

The HumanML Human Markup comes about in aid of fomenting accurate
communication, for which CULTURAL characterizations will be included, 
at an abstract level in Primary and more concretely in Secondary Schemas.

The culture-characterization portion of Primary HumanML markup terms
describe types of cultural features; Secondary schemas expand them in
characterizing particular cultures.
Cultural characterization that bears on communication will be emphasized.

$$$$$$$  

Further specification that all this is in aid of electronic communication
in particular might be appropriate, if that is the case now and will be
later also.

SC