1543RE: [humanmarkup] Re: [h-anim] HumanML Thoughts
- Aug 23, 2001Good work. Right. It is part of the middleware. I'll try to enlist
Jan to help. I thought this had moved to OASIS already? I just added
At 8:22 AM -0500 8/23/01, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>I'm pulling Carol from the reply list because we are probably--
>bumming her out with design discussion.
>Rex or Niclas: the UPenn work has never been publicly discussed
>on the list. If you have studied it, can you provide a summary
>of the what Laban Movement Analysis and the EMOTE engine do and
>how they work. It may be that these are implementations of the
>kind of middleware that Cindy states is HumanML's to do, but it
>is also likely that these are implementation solutions people
>can use but are not necessarily useful for the spec other than
>to show the spec can be used by them. In other words, they
>are systems that can consume HumanML but don't define it.
>Without more details, it's hard to tell.
>Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
>Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
>From: Niclas Olofsson [mailto:gurun@...]
>Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 6:58 PM
>Cc: James Smith; carol.geyer@...
>Subject: Re: [humanmarkup] Re: [h-anim] HumanML Thoughts
><?xml version="1.0" ?>
>Rex Brooks wrote:
>> Nic, the time is shortly to arrive for just that exploration. There
>> is a thread with NormBadler at UPenn's Human Simulation Group with
>> Matt Beitler et al, that I will eventually get into some kind of
>> presentable form for both HumanML and H-Anim--using Laban Movement
>> Analysis and Badler's EMOTE engine that fills the bill as far as I
>> can see right now.
>Very interesting, but nope, that alone will not do it. A very good
>starting point though. Looking at EMOTE it appears to me as yet another
>level of abstraction that perhaps would make things easier. It can
>perhaps provide a level of abstraction above FAP's and provide H-Anim
>(or whatever human animation format) with a somewhat more dynamic
>presentation. In the same time it provides authors and computers with a
>more fuzzy means of communications.
>But (a big BUT), in regular software design terms, most of this stuff
>belongs in the outermost presentation layer. EMOTE gets close to filling
>in as the presentation logic (backed up by h-anim representation). I'm
>looking for the layer beneath it, the business logic of human
>communication. Does it make any sense? Probably not. But I do collective
>design. The system we are building right now took me since january to
>design, but we build the core in only 3 weeks. I think this will work
>pretty much the same, only it will take a couple of years instead. If
>this where ready for prime time I'd be the first to start a task force
>around it. But it isn't. It will take years. And I'll be there then.
>Waiting. After all, this is what MY life is all about. I'm 30 today. I
>have time :-)
>To unsubscribe send an email to:
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
Fax: By Request
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>