[humanmarkup] Re: [humanmarkup-comment] HumanML Language ComponentsTasks

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Title: Re: [humanmarkup-comment] HumanML Language Components

I will be working with Rob, who is chairing the Subcommittee  because I have a lot of VR experience, but little AI at all. Also I will most likely act as Liaison with Web3D Consortium since I am a member of that organization also and have served formally on working groups and task groups.

Also, I will be actively seeking the participation of the folks at UPenn Center for Human Modeling and Simulation. This is work that can see functional prototype apps in as little as six months, depending on how Web3D and H-Anim progress. While that can be exciting, it is also fraught with pitfalls which I will start bringing up next week.

If you haven't been following the foofooraw on xml-dev about the W3C's rather fumbling patent policy, be aware that there are some developments that we must also be aware of as we proceed in this arena.

Ciao,

Rex

At 10:56 AM -0700 10/12/01, Kurt Cagle wrote:

> I'll act as
> Len's second on this; as you say, I'll see it eventually anyway so
> might as well stay in front of it. Please note that I'm not a strong
> VR guy, however (though I do a wicked mermaid in Poser), so I'll be
> following the leads of Rex and Len on that score.
>  
> --
> Kurt
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Rex
> > Brooks
> > To: Bullard,
> > Claude L (Len) ; Rex
> > Brooks ; humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 9:58 AM
> > Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] HumanML Language
> > Components Tasks
> >
> > Thanks Len,
> >
> > I suspect Kurt will be willing since he is the Technical
> > Editor and it will get in front him eventually anyway.
> >
> > Also, I managed to fail to connect up the sentence wherein
> > I mentioned you. It should read:
> >
> > Just before ..., I had suggested that the Applications
> > Domains that we have already identified, i.e. VR-AI and Physical
> > Description should start separate threads to start identifying
> > Domain-specific Requirements which (can be addressed) by 
> > the larger XML Schema effort,...
> >
> > My brain gets ahead of my fingers...
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Rex
> >
> > At 11:04 AM -0500 10/12/01, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
> > wrote:
> > > I'll take the assignment but I want to request Kurt
> > > Cagle as co-Head for that given
> > > that he has
> > > the same or more experience than I do with XML Schemas and
> > > it
> > > is wise to
> > > have redundancy for these vital tasks given that at any time, any 
> > > of
> > > us can be
> > > drawn away to other non-HumanML tasks.
> > >  
> > > len
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
> > > > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 10:58 AM
> > > > To: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] HumanML Language Components
> > > > Tasks
> > > > Hi Folks,
> > > >
> > > > Please excuse the unPC gif, but the file size was smaller
> > > > and this is for reference purposes only.
> > > >
> > > > I think we need to see diagrammatically how the XML
> > > > (Resources) and RDF (Resources Framework) play sitting next to each
> > > > other. I decided not to get crazy with trying to draw lines with
> > > > arrows in favor of explaining briefly what i think needs to be done
> > > > now in preparation for our next TC Meeting next Wednesday, Oct. 17,
> > > > 2001.
> > > >
> > > > Forming Subcommittees was already on the agenda and the
> > > > VR-AI and Physical Description Subcommittees have already been
> > > > proposed and we have had a bit of discussion on broader issues brought
> > > > about by Rob's diligent work in getting his own subcommittee work
> > > > underway, many thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Then we had Sean's little bombshell and a flurry of
> > > > activity and sudden attention, and now we have, hopefully the
> > > > beginning of a discussion on what is needed for an RDF Core which
> > > > Manos has volunteered to undertake, again many thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Just before Sean's article announcement, I had suggested
> > > > that the Applications Domains that we have already identified, i.e.
> > > > VR-AI and Physical Description should start separate threads to start
> > > > identifying Domain-specific Requirements which the larger XML Schema
> > > > effort, for which we need a Subcommittee which Len has been suggested
> > > > as being the clear choice for heading up. I would like to repeat that
> > > > specific request.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Since we have not heard from Sudhakar, I will write to him
> > > > personally if we have not heard from him by the time we get word of
> > > > the details for our upcoming meeting teleconference.
> > > >
> > > > I am also suggesting in this little diagram that the other
> > > > Application Domain that we have tread around without getting specific
> > > > about is Translations both Linguistic and Cultural, and I would hope
> > > > that someone would step forward, like our now quiet anthropologist,
> > > > who will also get his bell rung personally if we do not hear from him,
> > > > to take on this task area because that's what this little diagram
> > > > is--a picture of the task areas we have on the ground in front of us.
> > > > This is all quite consistent with what Ranjeeth has also proposed, and
> > > > which I am appending after this as a reminder.
> > > >
> > > > Ciao,
> > > > Rex
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Ranjeeth's message from Wednesday: (Rex's bold
> > > > underlines)
> > > >
> > > > Here are the lessons from 'recent discussion', in summary
> > > > format (I know
> > > > I've skipped what I didn't make it through my own mental filtering
> > > > system,
> > > > but regardless feel free to add points, in point format...
> > > >
> > > > ready to move forward?
> > > > 1) deliverables:  Whether we
> > > > follow through or not, or whether unreasonable
> > > > or not,  whether we postpone them or not, we need them.  
> > > > They are an  OASIS
> > > > requirement.  We'll make em as reasonable as possible however,
> > > > based on
> > > > feedback from everyone.
> > > > 2) use cases:  mutually agreed. 
> > > > Len has pointed out use-cases during Phase
> > > > 1, but I don't think we've followed through on them as a group. 
> > > > We'll stick
> > > > with a couple of group use-cases that we all agree can be the focal
> > > > point of
> > > > discussion.  Focusing on communication issues regarding the
> > > > current world
> > > > situation is what I'd like to propose, as it is the most potential
> > > > mportant
> > > > result of our work.
> > > >
> > > > 3) controversy and harsh tones:  inspires discussion...let's use
> > > > it more
> > > > often, or at least when needed.  It's a bit of fun, and like a
> > > > bit of
> > > > excitement (I think Sean might be thinking this too)?  I think
> > > > Michael
> > > > Jackson knew the secret too...except he went a little 'too' far with
> > > > the
> > > > controversy thing..can backfire...use with caution.
> > > >
> > > > 4) clean-up:  at the end of the day, someone will have to read
> > > > all these
> > > > posts and organize them coherently.  I can help, and as much as
> > > > I'd like to
> > > > I will, but it isn't gonna be me
> > > > 5) structure:  we build
> > > > proposals and publish them...publish anything, even
> > > > if hogwash...why?  because we can always point to it, and build
> > > > on top of
> > > > them.  Unlike Phase 0, where we tried to do so, but documents got
> > > > buried
> > > > underneath directories in YahooGroups.  I would push
> > > > to publish everything
> > > > in a 'flat list' on the OASIS website, so everything is fully
> > > > transparent.
> > > > 6) initial documents: The bottom line is if
> > > > it doesn't fit in these
> > > > documents, or within a proposal, it isn't going anywhere...This is
> > > > what
> > > > others see, and what we have isn't very flattering right now. 
> > > > These have to
> > > > be shaped up.
> > > >
> > > > 7) free discussion: inspiring and develops the mind, may need to
> > > > be
> > > > constrained a little though.
> > > > 7) roles:  we all need to know what
> > > > we're accountable for...if we don't,
> > > > that is fine too...but that has to be clear as well.
> > > >
> > > > 8) repeating frustration/concern:  express yourself...don't hold
> > > > back or
> > > > wait for a trigger....(well, at least make sure it is manageable
> > > > and
> > > > solution-oriented, and make sure that you are the first one to
> > > > take
> > > > responsibility)...we succeed as a group, or fail as a group...(I
> > > > just
> > > > watched the movie The Musketeer).  Say once, say twice, say three
> > > > times, say
> > > > ten times, and each time more loudly and biting...in this free market
> > > > of
> > > > ideas, that's how it goes.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --------
> > > > Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Rex
> > > > Brooks
> > > > GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
> > > > W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
> > > > Email: rexb@starbourne.com
> > > > Tel:
> > > > 510-849-2309
> > > > Fax: By Request
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rex
> > Brooks
> > GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
> > W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
> > Email: rexb@starbourne.com
> > Tel:
> > 510-849-2309
> > Fax: By Request

-- 

Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email: rexb@starbourne.com

Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request