OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

humanmarkup message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: [humanmarkup] PBS-Doc-proxemic

Title: PBS-Doc-proxemic
This was a lively discussion which necessitated changing the complexType name to maeasurement-unit, which I have done, along with stipulating that we may import the namespaces of measurement system standards. I also changed the description/definition so that it states that measurement-unit is used to establish the use of a recognized and cited measurement system for an application using our Primary Base Schema.

Beyond that I note, but did nothing in the schema, that we need to settle on a policy or schema element for assigning values to subjective perceptions such as intensity of emotions, other than our range datatype. Manos' idea of properties toolkit for these is excellent, and I hope we can collectively remember to get back to that idea.

Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - measurement

             From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             To: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org, humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org
             Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 07:06:37 -0700

      Ah, at last, an element that I believe will be darn difficult to question.

      But I'm going to try. Actually I am just going to add a bit that I
      think is necessary.


      This is a Complex Type element without the attribute abstract. It is
      described and defined as being used to creat distance or length
      values. It does not reference other elements. It is not used by other

      I would add all the standard weights and measures. I will check on
      the best references for that.

      My only question is whether there are distinctly human values for
      which we need to have physical measurements? I don't think so.

      However, do we need separate measurements for olfactory and taste
      data? I suspect that we need to ask if those should be in the primary
      or in the Human Physical Characteristics Description Markup Language
      as adjunct values for sensory phenomena? I suppose we might also want
      to clarify intensity values which we will be using for haptics,
      emotion, kinesics, but I don't think they apply to this element. I'm
      mostly thinking out loud so to speak here since measurements apply to
      so many phenomena, many of which are somewhat or wholly subjective
      and I certainly do not think we should attempt to create measurements
      for such on our own.


From the Desk of James E. Landrum III
      Database Manager
      Archaeology Technologies Laboratory (ATL; http://atl.ndsu.edu)
      Digital Archive Network for Anthropology (DANA; http://atl.ndsu.edu/archive)
      North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58105
      Ph: 701-231-7115 (my desk) and ATL 701-231-6434
      FAX: 701-231-1047
      email: james.landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu

Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base Schema - measurement-part 2

             From: James Landrum <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>
             To: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 12:14:00 -0500

      Point here is that "measurement" is not the same as "measurement_unit"
      Measurement is the action of measuring or the result of applying a unit
      of measure to an object or subject, based on a measurement standard (or
      measurement_unit), expressed most often numerically, i.e.,
      quantitatively, and more often these are scientifically "objective"
      data.  Measurement can can also be expressed qualitatively, e.g., high,
      medium, low, short, long, happy, sad, depressed, manic, etc., and the
      qualitative measurement is often more subjective, rather than objective.

Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base Schema - measurement-part 2

             From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             To: James Landrum <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>,Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 10:33:42 -0700

      I think we need to give some thought to the best way to handle
      subjective measurements, since I suspect that we will have to
      consider these to be somewhat individual interpretations perhaps
      modified by cultural context.

      We will have both the kinesic vocabularies (and how they can be
      modified by somewhat arbitrarily scaled numeric values if included in
      the Primary Base Schema) and the emotion intensities to consider
      along with these subjective, qualitative estimations of some kind of
      value-equivalence for some elements. Perhaps we can put this on the
      agenda for tomorrow's meeting. If I hear no objections, I will
      include it for discussion.


Subject: Re: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base Schema - measurement-part 2

             From: "Emmanuil Batsis (Manos)" <mbatsis@netsmart.gr>
             To: James Landrum <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>
             Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:31:41 +0300

      Hi James,

      Absolutelly. We need a hierarchy composed of abstract properties to be
      used as a toolkit for totally subjective measurments; such an approach
      is the only way to provide reusable base for vertical applications (==

      I would be interested to hear opinions on whether doing such a hierarchy
      should climb to the point where properties are aware of types such as
      primitives (as known from programming languages) or even further.

      Personally, I would favour implementation-independent ranges (types) for
      these properties to be aware of. Sets for example (such RGB color
      values). Such design techniques can proove usefull to fallback
      mechanisms without having to deal with
      platform/implementation/application specific requierments.

      If one needs XSD like types, he/she can always import them and extend
      them; we don't have to reinvent the wheel. Let's try to inovate a little...



Subject: Re: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base Schema - measurement-part 2

             From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             To: "Emmanuil Batsis (Manos)" <mbatsis@netsmart.gr>,James Landrum
             Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 12:00:04 -0700

      I think this is a good idea. I would like to hear more about how to
      adopt it. For one thing, we need a way to clearly describe the
      hierarchy of these abstract values. Would an rdf schema be better, to
      which we could refer or use in preference to the xsd elements for
      this aspect of asserting values for subjective measurements? This is
      a question not a suggestion? However, I will look for you on YahooIM
      tomorrow morning my time, before the meeting if you have any further
      ideas then that you don't get around to today.


Subject: Re: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base Schema - measurement-part 2

             From: James Landrum <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>
             To: "Emmanuil Batsis (Manos)" <mbatsis@netsmart.gr>
             Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 16:15:01 -0500

      Yes on this post and also in response to other post about adding
      measurement to agenda- good idea, along with all the rest- plus, weren't
      you planning on adding bibliography item to the agenda?

      One thing to consider is the arbitrary and often researcher specific
      tendencies that influence the scope and scale of measurement and choice
      of measurement_units, and note also that it is not uncommon for social
      scientists to codify the subjective content and "scientificize" their
      data, e.g., good = 1, bad = 0, etc., but I don't think that we should
      worry about that here, just mentioning it for future consideration.
      Measurements have context specific properties and the  numeric (e.g.,
      1-n) values and the Measurement_Units (e.g., centimeters,
      millimeters,milligrams, or whatever) applied are much more easily
      compartmentalized than are the other sort. Perhaps best to start
      discussion with focus on the numeric and,  measurement_unit standards
      for weights and measures. Then we can do an overview on the more
      subjective qualitative measurement issues.  These are, as always, just

Subject: Re: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base Schema - measurement-part 2

             From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             To: James Landrum <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>,"Emmanuil Batsis (Manos)"
             Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 07:16:16 -0700

      My apologies for not answering this yesterday.

      Yes, the bibliography issue is one that is part of the agenda for
      today's meeting. OASIS has been issuing a set of updated requirements
      which I have been reviewing to see if there are particular
      requirements that we need to be informed about. Unfortunately the
      details of the approval process changes have not yet been provided on
      the OASIS website, so I have been unable to come to a satisfactory
      conclusion about that and how or if it affects our work and the work
      of the Web Services for Interactive Applications TC, to which I also
      belong and for which I do the webmastering, too. I don't think there
      is anything that we need to be aware of today. In any event, the
      issue of the Bibliographical and cross-standards references I would
      like to codify are not yet clear in terms of what is approvable. We
      will discuss it.


Title: Fwd: Re: Base Schema - measurement and self-comment
      Hi Folks,

      Those who attended today's meeting might remember that I said I occasionally receive comments sent directly to me personally and that I ask permission before forwarding them, and I suggest doing so if you receive a personal reply to one of your posts and you think it is worth forwarding to our lists. I am forwarding this one because I received permission, and I also think that the point is pertinent.

      Measurement systems can be used in many ways, and comparisons between items that are not related in a first order way, such as the costs/month of two telephone vendors are related in a first order sort of comparison, are often useful. The ability to be clear when such comparisons are made is one of the concerns we will certainly bear in mind in our language, so that we can communicate accurately and with impactfulness when needed.


                  Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 10:20:19 -0700
                  To: "CPPE/BOACOM Corp." <jeronimo@istar.ca>
                  From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
                  Subject: Re: Base Schema - measurement and self-comment

                  Hi Jerome,

                  Please forgive my informality if it is inappropriate. This is a very pertinent question so I would like  to have your permission to post it to the TC mailing list.

                  The question is very focused on the phrase, distinctive human values, and I think it deserves to be addressed both to you personally and to the list, so I will wait on posting a copy of this letter to the list until I have your permission.

                  Basically, the kind of value to which I was referring in relation to measurement as an element of our Primary Base Schema is one of quantity or amount. That is a numerical value that can be assigned to a physical object. So in that sense, when I said that I did not think there was a need for a physical measurement of a distinctly human value, what I meant was that I did not think  there was a need for a new physical measurement for existing distinctly human values, meaning that we already have sufficient measurements available to use for such things body weight, height, eye color, distance between locations, cost of food in rural Uganda or upstate New York,  etc.

                  However, you bring up a very important point in terms of comparing different kinds of values
which can be compared on a numerical basis even if they are not alike in terms of what is  measured. By associating two essentially different kinds of things that are seemingly unrelated in terms of cost per consideration such as the cost of stealth bomber and therefore the relative cost of the pilot's safety and security and the safety and security of the entire population of Haiti, you make it possible to see the relative worth of the items in a different light than that which is used  to examine these items during a cost evaluation by a body which is considering spending money for those items, such as the U.S. Congress.

                  In this case I would say that the comparison is valuable to make, but I don't think that there are particular elements in the comparison as stated which one needs HumanML to clarify. However, there is a point in the comparison where HumanML could be valuable, and that would be in
pointing out how needs/values differ by culture in allocating resources and in experiencing the
realities of poverty and lack of opportunity. If such a comparison is presented to show the
discrepancies responsible for engendering long-term generational anger and antipathy that resultin measureable damage to humans on all sides of a given situation, THEN we may improve
understanding and communication. The issue then becomes one of finding the most effective way to present information to gain understanding through carefully directed communications.

                  So, if I could have your permission to post this message to our public-comment list, I would
                  appreciate it. It makes an important point that we should consider as we shape the Human
                  Markup Language.


                  Rex Brooks

                               Dear Mr. Brooks

                               My only question
                                is whether
                                there are distinctly human values
                               for which we need to
                               have physical measurements?
                               I don't think so.(Rex Brooks)

                               In my very humble opinion, I would think that each of these statements would
                               merit consideration for action.
                               If there are no physical measurements for distinctive human values, then
                               there are very likely no other forms of measurement either, which is absurd
                               to say the least. (Jerome Michaud)

                               I have been following OASIS XML threads and your leadership in particular. I
                               am most fascinated but how much has to be done so quickly from the
                               commercial standpoint (dot org @ dot com or vice versa)and yet seems to
                               evolve so slowly from the from the dot edu perspective. i.e a recent IFIP
                               World Computer Congress in Montreal pointed this out to me.

                               One group presenter from Holland  at the WCC IFIP refered to Maslow's
                               hierarchy of needs/values. For example, the safety and security needs of one
                               pilot in one Stealth airplane represents in economic terms, let's say the
                               safety and security needs of  the entire population of Haiti for ten years.

                               How would the internet societies weight the relative values of  the Stealth
                               pilot's life versus those of the population of Haiti?
                               Distinctive human values and not so distinctive internet measurement, I

                               Thanks again for accelrating the editor's learning curves. Jerome Michaud

                               Children's Charter Foundation CCF
                               Fondation Charte des enfants FCE
                               31,rue Hadley, Hull (Gatineau-Outaouais-QC.CA) J8Y 3K6
                               Tel 819-771-2040, Fax 819-776-0904
                               www.parlom.ca     carta@istar.ca

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC