humanmarkup message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [humanmarkup] PBS-Doc-measurement-unit
- 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 14:01:57 -0700
Title: PBS-Doc-measurement-unit
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.
measurement
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
elements.
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.
Ciao,
Rex
--
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.
Ciao,
Rex
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 (==
subjective).
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...
Regards,
Manos
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
<James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu>
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.
Thanks,
Rex
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
suggestions.
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)"
<mbatsis@netsmart.gr>
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.
Ciao,
Rex
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.
Ciao,
Rex
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
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments:
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.
Thanks,
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
feel.
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