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-symbol

Title: PBS-Doc-symbol
Very little changed here except changing humlIdentifierAtts to humlCommAtts and shortened the definition. If we need to we can revisit the concept in the public review, but I think it is pretty sound.
No double meaning meant.

Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - signal

             From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             To: humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org, humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
             Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 08:09:34 -0700

      Hi Everyone,

      We're baaack!

      This element is a ComplexType, abstract, does not reference other
      elements. I'm not sure, as I am not sure with many other elements,
      whether we want to stipulate that it is not used by other elements,
      although for these three semiotics elements, we may want to give it
      more thought.

      It is described/defined as: Human Signal An interruption in a field
      of constant energy transfer. An example is the the dots and dashes
      that open and close the electromagnetic field of a telegraph circuit.
      The basic function of such signals is to provide the change of a
      single environmental factor to attract attention and to transfer

      I will defer to the final determination of the group, but I think we
      may want to refine this a bit. Oddly enough, I think that could
      result is a shorter description to something like: a perceptible
      change in an environmental factor that can be used to transfer

      In any event, it is also a member of the group of elements that
      shares the attribute group: humlIdentifierAtts.

      My trepidation with the concept of use by other elements is that of
      finding a way to specify that while atomistic in the Primary Base
      Schema, all elements in this schema are meant to be used by child
      elements in the succeeding schemata. We might want to say that the
      elements in this schema are intended to be used to derive the
      elements of the Secondary Base Schema, which in turn are meant to be
      referenced by the Application Area-Specific Schemata member elements.


Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - signal

             From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
             To: 'Rex Brooks' <rexb@starbourne.com>, humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
             Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 10:25:00 -0500

      I'll go with the simpler explanation. 

      Some further questions.  Another example
      often given is a tapping, eg, someone tapping
      a pencil on a desk.  Now, does this have to
      be purposeful to be a signal?  IOW, does bored
      reflexive tapping make it as a signal, or does
      it have to be purposeful.  Another example
      is "PSSST!"  This doesn't qualify as an energy
      disruption.  It is the purposeful pursing of
      the lips and blowing air to get someone's attention.

      So to be a signal, does the sign have to be:

      1.  Purposeful
      2.  Directed toward a receiver(s)


Subject: Re: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - signal

             From: James Landrum <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>
             To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
             Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:11:57 -0500

      Hmmmm,  How deep should we delve here?
      A signal is an action or event, a stimulus that precipitates one or more
      reactions, inclusive of observance without outwardly visible response.
      E.G., (1) the events of 9/11 signaled a major change in US security
      policy. (2) Igor observed the monster crush Dr. Frankenstein's head to a
      glutinous, mottle of red-gray pulp, as though it were an overripe melon.
       The action an inescapable product of the monster's rage, the message
      (signal) clear enough for even the simplest of minds to comprehend, the
      monster had had enough of the mad doctor's genius. Despite the
      terrifying circumstance, Igor stood there immobile, in an intractable
      stupor, doing nothing but knowing all the while, even as the monster
      continued bashing the unfortunate doctor into an unrecognizable mash of
      blood, flesh, and bones, that he was next in line. Deep within Igor's
      mind a synapse flickered, sending a message (signal) to his conscience
      that despite the brutality the monster was capable of and would soon
      direct upon him, that in no small way it was righteous anger on the
      monster's part, for Igor had helped Frankenstein create this monster,
      and the monster , now self-aware, would not allow such insanity to be
      perpertrated further upon himself or others, and his impending doom, was
      therefore, both just and sorely deserved.

      Perhaps a bit long-winded (and perhaps too graphically violent as well)
      bvut the piont of the above points (1 and 2) are that signals are not
      mere actions, they are events of themselves and can be both objectively
      as well as subjectively observed and interpreted, but perhaps just as
      important, a signal is, in the human context at least, more often an
      intentional action to of a transmitter to communicate, to transmit
      information in a salient (meaningful) way, so as to evoke one or more
      anticipated reactions from the receiver.  This, of course, is inclusive
      of that often-observed miscommunitation, the :missed signal.

Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - signal

             From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
             To: 'James Landrum' <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>
             Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:16:49 -0500

      The term "signal" in this application is constrained
      quite deliberately to a limited definition.  We got
      it from the literature, not the natural language.
      Delving deeply is not warranted.


Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema - signal

             From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
             To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>,'James Landrum'
             Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 12:58:34 -0700

      While I understand Len's reply, especially since I am about as deeply
      immersed in the semiotic literature and the history of the semiotic
      schools of thought as it is possible to be right now, I also
      understand the points James was making. So what I want to say about
      this is that the rest of the world still is not semiotically
      literate, and the kind of points James brings up are the kinds of
      responses we are likely to receive from the most educated and
      literate of audience.

      This is what I meant when I mentioned that we need to be able sell
      HumanMarkup as well as invent it. Now, what I would hope to see is
      for both of you to approach this exchange from the other's viewpoint
      if that is possible and is not too much to ask, which I would
      understand as well.

      This would be especially helpful to me, since I am working on
      explaining this entire set of elements (the semiotic ones). I think
      we would be well advised to deal with this aspect of our work now,
      while the trail of possible misunderstandings is fresh.


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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC