Re: [huml-comment] Request for a motion on PC-33 -Section 4.4.6-r ace

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

With the Human Genome now read, we can do much better than that 
eventually. As used, race is non-objective.

Ciao,
Rex

At 6:51 PM +0200 12/5/02, Emmanuil Batsis (Manos) wrote:
>Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>
>>Race:
>>  A = Asian
>>B = Black
>>I = Indian
>>W = White
>>U = Unknown
>
>
>What if my father was half Asian and half White, and my mother half 
>Black and half White; what would I be?
>Given that this attribute is just of type xs:string and not an 
>enumeration (not that such a constraint would help) does not really 
>help. The information contained is to be unpredictable at best.
>
>Putting ethical arguments aside, this attribute does not serve much. 
>Now, if a complex type could trace races up my bloodline, that would 
>be something. Yup, that would be pretty objective...
>
>Manos
>
>
>
>
>
>>  one sees a term followed by a codelist.   What HumanML could provide
>>would be a set of properties for the term, race, which could then be used
>>to make a selection from that set given an instance.   That set might
>>include rules or might be a simple prototype such as slots with 
>>values for physical
>>characteristics common to members of the set, historical origins, and so on.
>>(In practice, this is hard to do, but I think that difficulty 
>>itself is valuable
>>in focusing the community of interest's use of the term; that in fact,
>>the real value of the term will decline.)
>>  Note:  the same approach would apply to declaring prototypes for
>>races of trolls, woodland, plains, mountain, or otherwise.   So this
>>is not special pleading, but precisely how HumanML is intended
>>to be used.
>>  Thanks to Dennis for pointing this one out.  It provides a good
>>example of how HumanML can be applied to a term of contention
>>such that typical users of the term can clarify precisely how
>>this term is defined below the level of the initial codelist.
>>  len
>>
>>     -----Original Message-----
>>     *From:* Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
>>
>>      I would prefer a stronger reason than that it simply can be shown
>>     to be non-objective despite current usages, and it can be derived
>>     from the existing PBS in a secondary schema, and it can be
>>     imported or declared from other interoperable resources. Those are
>>     sufficient, but not compelling reasons, whether reapplicable or not.
>>     
>>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>


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