humanmarkup message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [humanmarkup] PBS-Doc-chronemic
- 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: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 15:02:47 -0700
Title: PBS-Doc-chronemic
Boy, am I ever gonna be genuinely tired of
this!
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Base
Schema-chronemic
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org,
humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:57:33 -0700
Hi Everyone,
I'm introducing a new element to
consider today. This is the first of
what I call our "stuff-ics"
family of elements that end with ic and
into which a lot of stuff is stuffed.
The other members of this
family are kinesics, haptics and
proxemics, to which I will suggest
adding cosmetics in a separate post.
However, one reason for pointing
out the apparent grouping of these
terms into a humorous family is to
call attention to one of the reasons
why I think it is important for
all of the OASIS standards to
contribute to a system-wide glossary.
Both our TC and the WSIA /WSRP TCs
include a glossary, and while I
haven't read all of the websites for
the TCs, I expect many also do
this. So I am copying this message to
Karl Best to consider that
suggestion--an OASIS glossary,
harmonizing usages where possible and
listing terms with their complete
definitions as used in OASIS
Standards with comparisons and/or
contrasts to usages outside of XML.
This came about because for the purpose
of not using or choosing
between or amongst several overloaded
terms it became necessary to
resort to calling a class of services
thingies until such time as
that discussion can settle on more
precise, less overloaded
terminology. We need a standard
reference for our standards. This
goes hand-in-glove with the development
of standard templates for
OASIS specifications and websites .
So, having said that, I will get down
off my soap box and proceed on
with the business to hand:
chronemic
This is a Complex Type with the
attribute of abstract, which we
should all be getting more familiar
with by now, though it applies
with some less apparent ramifications
in this element.
This element gathers together the
concepts related to human time
management, and they can be used very
different with respect to
individuals and cultures. Time
perceptions include punctuality,
readiness to act, willingness to wait,
and how such states influence
interactions. Time use affects
lifestyles, daily agendas, speech and
movement, to name only a few.
Rather than cite the entire description
from the straw man schema, I
am going to ask you to refresh your
memories by reading it again, and
I will introduce more of those less
apparent ramifications later this
week. However, as I ready my further
comments for channel and
chronemic, I would like you all to
consider some relatively pressing
connections between our efforts and
such efforts as knowledge
management, which, like time
management, involves one of the largest
areas for human markup to provide means
for improving. Pulling, or
extracting, or abstracting data from
anecdotal text, such as
conference reports, historical
accounts, etc, is one of the tools
HumanMarkup can provide and one of the
aims we seek to fulfill.
More to come,
Rex
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Rex Brooks' <rexb@starbourne.com>,
humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 08:12:55 -0500
Are those clock time or what is
sometimes called
virtual time, a schedule mapped onto
clock time
sometimes with rules for scaling the
intervals?
len
From: Rex Brooks
[mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
In thinking about chronemic elements,
beyond the time-binding aspect
of session-specific interactions
between humans, between machine(s)
and human(s), between agent(s) and
human(s), between machine(s) and
agent(s) and between agents, both in
real-time transactional
interactions like shopping,
discussions, and information searches, or
simulation scenarios, I am struck by
the necessity to expand this
notion to include archeological,
geological, and anthropological time.
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
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
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 07:10:15 -0700
Session-specific, which means as long
as an internet connection is
active between two or more end-users,
it is clock/virtual time.
Archeological, geological and
anthropological, I don't have a term
for, and would defer to the scholars in
those arenas for help.
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>,
humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org,humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 05:53:54 -0700
Hi again,
While it seems a bit gratuitous to
reply to my own posts, it is
necessary to keep the sequential nature
of the threads in order.
In thinking about chronemic elements,
beyond the time-binding aspect
of session-specific interactions
between humans, between machine(s)
and human(s), between agent(s) and
human(s), between machine(s) and
agent(s) and between agents, both in
real-time transactional
interactions like shopping,
discussions, and information searches, or
simulation scenarios, I am struck by
the necessity to expand this
notion to include archeological,
geological, and anthropological time.
Thoughts?
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Rex Brooks' <rexb@starbourne.com>,
humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 09:37:02 -0500
Humans have sessions in the abstract
sense as long
as a conversation or communication has
an begin time
and end time.
What you are describing is virtual
time. It is an
artifice for mapping to real time/clock
time. A
set of names are provided that are
mapped to durations
where duration has a clock value.
That mapping enables
scaling such as musical beats per
minute, and
which symbol (note) gets one beat in
music. Project
schedulers use this concept. So
does SMIL and any
hypermedia toolkit. I don't think
the notion of
session as in an Internet connection is
typically
applicable to the human use or
perception of time so
I need some clarification as to why
that is being
introduced.
Geologists divide time over events in
the earth's
history into periods.
Archaeologists have a similar
system. Historians have these as
well.
In fact, this is a secondary schema set
of
names. What the base has to
provide is a means of
describing the scaling or to borrow it,
say from
SMIL. That a communication has a
chronemic aspect
should be expressible and
simple. The rule for how
it affects the parties to the
communication or the
communication itself is in the
secondary.
len
Subject: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>,
humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org,humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 08:55:09 -0700
Hi again, again,
Is it the case that no one has anything
to say about chronemic? I
know this is not the case because
various aspects of time-binding
have been mentioned in the discussions
of artifact and channel.
However, to be able to pull those ideas
out of the threads we are
creating, they need to be brought up in
messages under the thread to
which they belong. This may seem
tedious, especially since OASIS is
very slow in updating those archives by
thread as opposed to dates.
This is something that I have to take
up with them soon, while I go
through updating our work according to
the emerging standard formats
they are developing as spectools.
So, please, if you can take the time,
pull out the time-based
arguments you have made. I think there
may be an application overlap
in the area of simulations of human
behavior within
archeological/anthropological contexts
that would directly employ
artifacts for forensic anthropology.
For instance, say a group wanted
to reconstruct living conditions of
Bronze Age Peoples from various
localities around the mediterranean and
contrast them with the living
conditions of similar people in the
Southwestern desert of North
America.
How many different aspects of
chronemics would be employed in
creating such simulations? How would
the simulations change with the
advent of further archeological
discoveries?
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Rex Brooks' <rexb@starbourne.com>,
humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 11:09:07 -0500
It's the usual TooMuchOnPlate day, but
I hope to provide
some comments related to the overall
set of types being
provided; to wit, we may need to back
off the alphabetical
review and look at the semiotic basis
and the definitions to establish
some basic definitions for signs.
Without those, understanding
how composites such as artifact work,
or applying non symbolic
concepts such as channel and chronemic
is hard. As I read
through the reviews, I get the sense of
the blind men and
elephant problem. That is, the
underlying theories people
apply to this are overlapping but not
isomorphic, so it is
truly difficult to know when a
consensus has been reached
with the terminology being
overloaded.
I need to understand how stratified
complexity systems
and semiotics converge in a common
application.
len
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
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
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 11:49:48 -0700
Good. It is best to be grounded.
The difficulty of overloaded
terminology is a growing concern in many
circles.I am, in fact, on yet another
sub-subcommittee on just that
topic: a specific glossary, and I have
already brought that up to
OASIS as something that needs work to
avoid some potential pitfalls.
Good luck with the coding.
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
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
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 10:41:58 -0700
I know about those TooMuchOnMyPlate
days.
As long as we keep the threads
recognizable I don't at all mind
taking a break from the alphabetical
approach to make sure we are all
grounded. We could then return to it or
not as we see fit.
However, my main concern is that we not
dissolve into a freeform
discussion
that becomes impossible to track and retrieve from the
archives. That was one of the big
problems in retrospect with our
Phase 0 work in terms of recreating the
chronology and the
development of the concepts we formed
as the basis for our subsequent
work. I see the problem in the context
of other OASIS TCs and other
standards bodies and working groups.
When I say problem, I mean
problemmatic, not difficult, although
it can be that, too.
As far as types are concerned, I was
under the impression that we
were just dealing with simple and
complex, and abstract or not in XML
terms. If by type you are referring to
the difference between
symbolic and non-symbolic, then the
discussion is broader than
strictly XML. I don't mind that,
either, as long as it we don't
confuse the issues we are
discussing.
I'm not sure what you mean by
stratified complexity systems and
semiotics converging in a common
application. Did you perhaps mean a
common approach or methodology? I know
for sure you would not suggest
HumanML as an application in and of
itself.
At least I think I do :)
Ciao,
Rex
Subject: RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Re: [humanmarkup] Base
Schema-chronemic
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
<clbullar@ingr.com>
To: 'Rex Brooks' <rexb@starbourne.com>,
humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 13:03:11 -0500
I think I can keep it straight if I do
it one bit at a time.
First, signs. The discussion of
channels went in different
directions, apparently, so I don't
think we can do that
until we do the more basic pieces.
As I stated into that,
I began to realize just how messy
channels are in the
primary because it is an overloaded
term in the literature.
Then, yes, we may need to talk about
semiotic applications.
Stratified complexity is the topic that
Paul has brought
up. What we need to determine
there is where that goes,
vis a vis, applications or I don't know
if we are talking
about the same things in the data.
So we may have to talk application
architectures just
a bit to make sure our abstractions are
indeed, consensual.
By introducing EMOTE concerns or
VR/simulation concerns,
the camel's nose is in the tent.
I was doing research yesterday and am
coding today
(Visual FoxPro....), so I will have to
come back to this.
len
--
Rex Brooks
Starbourne Communications Design
1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA 94702 *510-849-2309
http://www.starbourne.com * rexb@starbourne.com
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC