RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema-haptic

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

Haptics among other things force out the need to identify 
how to denote co-occurrence constraints.   For example, when 
the culture is Borg, the haptic values fall into say 
some range depending on the other relationships in effect 
at the time and place and objects present (the context).
This aspect of situatedness that the KR folks talk about 
dominates the design of a description of a human 
communication.

That is why as I have been working the semiote requirements, 
I have found myself focusing more on individual selector 
types that have to be active in order for a semiote to 
choose among signs both to perceive (what we don't 
believe or understand, we don't note), and to send 
(our emotional values weight our selections even 
when logic says otherwise).  These selectors are 
activated by among other things, the **proximity** of 
other objects in the environment and the signs they 
can receive and emit, and will receive and emit. 
It begins to look very object-oriented in implementation, 
but a VRMLie usually understands how this is modeled 
in the coordinate space, and an AI guy knows how to 
represent the relationships in db objects that feed 
that real time engine.

Seeing that early, I left a lot of the primaries 
abstract because I think we have to have some simple 
and reasonably uniform/universal definitions up 
there.  It is as said, a weak ontology because 
a strong one would quickly lead to fractures.
Many object designs have weak abstract classes.  

You are right, but haptic is just touching behavior. 
The rest has to be done in combinations of co-ocurring 
ranges of values of the other elements.  The combinations 
don't occur in the primary, but in the secondaries. Yes?

len


From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]

haptic

The element is a ComplexType and abstract . It does not reference 
other elements and is not used by other elements and belongs to the 
attribute group humlIentifierAtts.

And that is where the easy categorization ends. I've been thinking 
about this element for a while now, and that is the reason why it ha 
taken me a while to get to it, rather than our other scheduled work, 
i.e. our most recent meeting. Rather than enumerate all the info in 
in the description which is fairly lengthy, I will have to ask that 
it be read because I want to suggest that we give this element quite 
a bit of thought. I do not in any way disagree with what Len has done 
in the straw man, and I will gladly accept that as the most useful 
definition of the term, but I think we need to consider it more 
deeply, especially as it relates to elements to come such as kinesic 
and proxemic.

There are at least three areas that come under haptic.

1. Touching behaviors involve the intimate, personal and social 
parameters which seem very much like they should either be their own 
elements as derivations or should be high level attributes, i.e. 
attributes of the Primary Base Element haptic itself and that would 
be the first time we would do that. I would prefer not to do that 
because I have always tried to avoid using attributes of elements 
wherever possible. They are messy and introduces a dose of 
computational complexity at a level in the processing of the XML 
schema that is a lot cleaner, faster, and easier without it. In 
addition, touching behaviors, as Len points out vary from culture to 
culture with differing rules for which body parts are used in various 
circumstances, as well as having great differences in the kinds of 
actions with which they are associated, such as hostility or 
affection.

2. Sensory channel functions for which an entire scientific 
discipline and literature exists--the mouse being an example of a 
haptic feedback-control mechanism.

3. Emotional Communication, while it involves or can involve both 
touching and sensory channels extends outward as the interface for a 
wide number of actions and reactions of a non-verbal nature which 
either communicate something completely without combining with any 
verbal communications such as a kiss leading to sexual arousal and 
complete sexual acts or pulling the trigger of a gun which may end 
another human being's life, but which may or may not be an emotional 
communication per se.

I suggest we spend some effort teasing these aspect of haptic apart 
and look at them in light of how they will be included in the 
semiotic engine for processing communications and how they will set a 
precedent for the other elements which fall into the non-verbal 
communications areas.

Please noe that I have not addressed the datatyping values because 
they are amply covered by what Len has already set down. I don't 
think we need to noodle that any further. We just need to come to 
grips with the range of aspects we are considering, which, as I said, 
could easily just be going with what we already have and leaving it 
at that. However, before we do that, I think we need to consider 
these other issues.