humanmarkup message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [humanmarkup] PBS-Doc-locator
- From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
- To: humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org, cognite@zianet.com, clbullar@ingr.com,kurt@kurtcagle.net, mbatsis@netsmart.gr
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:04:44 -0700
Title: PBS-Doc-locator
We had rather a lot to say about locator,
compared to some others one might think more critical, but hey, that's
what discussion is for, right?
In looking at how we resolved this and the
issue of a geo-temporal complexType or attrbute, and it seems to
me that this should be decided in the pubic comment period. I think
that having a geolocator and humlTemporalAtts can handle the job, so I
left well enough alone for now, but I could be fairly easily persuaded
that we need a different complexType or attribute.
Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema
- locator
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org,
humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 06:58:29 -0700
Hi Everyone,
Onward...
locator
The element is Complex Type, derived by
restrictin from xsd.string is
not classified as abstract.
It does not reference other elements.
It is not used by other elements
It is described/defined as a simple set
of names of locations ON an object.
I don't have a lot to say about this
one except that I'm not sure why
we need it. I don't object to it, and
I'm not suggesting we delete
it, I just don't know what the special
use is that we have for it
that raises it to the level of
necessity for inclusion in the base
schema. I understand body location on a
human object, but I'm not
quite sure about locatin on an object
per se. I suspect that like a
few other things that don't seem
obvious to me, as soon as someone
shows me an example of how it would be
used, I will do a Homer
Simpson, apply palm to forehead and
utter a plaintive, "Doh!"
Anyway, I'm not gonna have a cow about
it.
Ciao,
Rex
--
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - locator
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Rex Brooks'
<rexb@starbourne.com>,"'humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org'"<humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 09:09:12 -0500
Without locators, you have not way to
provide a spatial
context for other objects. It is
there as a placeholder
to note that fact. When you
break down the parts of
any assembly, you generally denote
these in terms of
say "upper",
"lower", "upper right" etc. This is a
code list for simple descriptions of
locations relative
to each other.
len
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - locator
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>,'Rex
Brooks'
<rexb@starbourne.com>,"'humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org'"<humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 08:14:37 -0700
I don't have a problem with locators,
and as I said, I am not
suggesting deleting it. I just wanted
to know what there is about it
that is special to HumanML as opposed
to the rest of the world or xml
in general. I see your points, and I
suspect that as we include it,
it will eventually be included in some
overall schema, perhaps the
semiotics schema if such a thing comes
about, or an ontological
schema of basic concepts or constructs
for an epistemological
framework that clarifies how we
describe general consensus reality.
Also, it occurs to me that we may need
to narrow object down for this
case so that it is clearly a sign for a
physical object, not a
computer network conceptual object.
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base
Schema - locator
From: Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga <rkthunga@interposting.com>
To: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org,
rexb@starboune.com,clbullar@ingr.com
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 15:05:02 -0400
The particular code list below, to me,
seems like 'proxemics'.
The distinction, as I currently see it,
is that 'locator' would be
simply an absolute reference for
objects, while 'proxemics' would be a
relative reference, relative of course
to other semiotes, or possibly
physical objects. Does that sound
right?
Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - locator
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Rex Brooks'
<rexb@starbourne.com>,"'humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org'"<humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 13:01:41 -0500
Here is an example of a data dictionary
that has a
geolocator system.
http://www.chin.gc.ca/Artefacts/RULA/e_sample.html
Consider that you might get to such a
site and then
have to identify the locations of
artifacts according
to a local coordinate grid whose root
is a geolocator
but the rest of the grid is some set of
xy or other
location names. For example, when
describing the
positions of artifacts, geological
strata are used
to date the artifact (the lower the
layer, the
older the artifact). This works
ok until one begins
to dig in caves where higher and lower
quit having
the same correlation.
We see in this sort of thing in
public safety when one describes a road
intersection,
or some location relative to a named
location.
If we are strictly sticking to our
charter, a locator
has to have an effect on human
communication for it
to be in our scope. I can make up
some cases for that,
but not today.
len
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - locator
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga'
<rkthunga@interposting.com>,humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org, rexb@starboune.com
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 09:09:35 -0500
Yes. A locator is just a
placeholder for a set of names
of relative locations for objects based
on natural language
descriptions. Proxemics takes on
social distances among
the semiotes (eg, should also take up
the rules for social
intercourse and how they affect
distance). In a proxemic
definition, we should be able to
discern given a cultural
orientation and personal history if the
distance a speaker
has to another speaker indicates
potential discomfort, dominance,
intimacy, etc.
Locators aren't that interesting an
element type. They could
be dumped without much loss.
len
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - locator
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>,'Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga'
<rkthunga@interposting.com>,humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org, rexb@starboune.com
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 06:50:27 -0700
Oh, I don't think we should drop
locator. Now that I understand it
better, I think it is absolutely
necessary that we have a low level,
primary element which is ours entirely
but which interoperates to
extend the standards in place for us. I
think that the example of an
artifact, especially an artifact that
is also a cultural symbol with
important associations for an
individual, such as an amulet, a cross,
a flag, etc needs to capable of
explicit treatment such as how it is
handled, where it is touched and when,
etc.
I sometimes ask questions that have
apparently obvious answers but
which I think need explicit
explanations, but I also sometimes just
ask questions because I'm just having a
dense moment but which serve
the same purpose. Not even I know the
difference all the time. This
was a case of one of those dense
moments and I really needed to have
the use made clear for me.
I agree that there are aspects of
locator which will be influenced by
proxemics and vice versa, but they are
distinct functions and
relationships should not be muddied by
conflating the two elements.
As Len points out, and we will have
this discussion more fully soon
since proxemic is coming up shortly.
Proxemics carry personal
information beyond immediate physical
relationships to objects and
persons.
I also want to ask if we should add a
third locator to our current
count of two, to include Sylvia's
suggestion of a geo-temporal
locator to geolocator and locator, or
do we think that combining the
geolocator element and the chronemic
element together to describe an
object's location physically and
temporally is sufficient?
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base
Schema - locator
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Rex Brooks' <rexb@starbourne.com>,'Ranjeeth Kumar
Thunga'
<rkthunga@interposting.com>,humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org, rexb@starboune.com
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 09:06:13 -0500
I vote for a combination of chronemic
and a locator.
That will map nicely to the way most
software represents
time and space data types. The
markup doesn't really
care but the implementation code
will.
len
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC