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-chronemic


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