[humanmarkup] RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Item by item approach toPrimary Base S chema

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

I am hoping to use it as a springboard, but it may prove educational 
as well. We have recently picked up quite a few more folks on our 
mailing list whose participation and understanding I would like to 
stimulate.

Since I have already signed off on it, it will serve to freshen up my 
own grasp and give me more crisp arguments to take on the road, so to 
speak. A bunch of tasks I have been doing in the background are 
almost done to the point of presentation, so I hope to sharpen my own 
skills a bit, too.

Ciao,
Rex

At 8:24 AM -0500 5/10/02, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>Suggest those who are not conversant with the basics of
>semiotics review some literature.  The Chandler papers
>online are a good start.  Otherwise, this review will
>not gel and will become as the last pass did, a fight
>over languages, schema types, and implementation details
>for particular systems.  If the differences say, between
>signs, symbols and signals aren't obvious, we'll have a
>hard time with this.
>
>len
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
>
>In order to stimulate debate and discussion, and to thoroughly ground
>us in the mechanics of a methodology that will, at the expense of
>some undeniable excess and unnecessary effort, put each and every
>element in our Base Primary Human Markup XML Schema into the record
>as having been openly discussed and decided upon, I am going to start
>next week a process of scrutinizing and approving this schema as is
>at least element item by element item.
>
>I will also add a note with each item about where in succeeding
>secondary schemata I see each element being used.


--