RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema-haptic

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

My first stab at that would be a proximity-driven 
definition in which each member depending on 
internal learned contexts in relationship to 
the real time situation has different values 
for touching and what the signs indicate, 
typically, a polarity where on that scale, 
each gets a different value in a highly 
mixed set (different internal values because 
of different internal contexts, but mediated 
by awareness of the social context; in Rome 
do as Romans do, so the signs they emit will 
be mediated); and fairly similar if flocking 
(relatively similar values in the same culture 
in the same context).

Makes for a nicely creative scene of networked 
objects.

len

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

Yes. I'm just looking to tease out those relationships and the 
situatedness you mention, and which David Dodds is working on, too. 
Haptics per se is just touching behavior, but we have to make sure we 
demarcate where touching and sensing diverge, while recognizing that 
in some circumstances they merge.

Not an easy distinction when sending and receiving get that close together.