RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema-haptic

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Good. That's what I'm looking for.

Ciao,
Rex


At 9:42 AM -0500 8/23/02, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>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.


-- 
Rex Brooks
Starbourne Communications Design
1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA 94702 *510-849-2309
http://www.starbourne.com * rexb@starbourne.com