Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [humanmarkup] HumanMarkup and other Initiatives

Expand Messages
  • Bullard, Claude L (Len)
    Good write up on the working list. I have some work to do here. fewest bags oSemantic with them when referenced. The semantic levels are the tough part
    Message 1 of 11 , Feb 26, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Good write up on the working list.  I have some work to do here.
       
      <len>
      fewest bags'oSemantic with them when
      referenced.  The semantic levels are the tough part of
      this because we can add globals almost endlessly.  We
      should practice parsimony and as in RDF get very good
      at writing very prescise <rdf:description> nodes.

      </len>
       
      <ranjeeth>I am curious what you meant...I am assuming you mean that semantic meta information shouldn't be haphazardly included (rather, it should be methodically included).</ranjeeth>
       
      I meant that a precise and concise description is very hard to
      write.   When the semantic or process for using the
      node is described rather than given explicitly, the
      interpretation becomes interpretable.   And so on
      to madness and shouting. :-)   Even the simplest
      description gets tortured.  I just got the editorial comments
      on the Golem article;  it is tough to get past a good
      editor and Sperberg-McQueen is a very good editor.
      So, back to the forge for Len....
       
      For all of its formality, an RDF is an opinion and so is a schema.  
      My appeal to the authority of the semioticians is to get an opinionated
      framework for which we can comfortably assume
      others have already done the required shouting.
      It's a start, or as Sean has seen me write before,
      a suitable means to start the fight.  To integrate with
      the other initiatives, we have to cleanly keep our framework
      inside a boundary for precisely what it describes and don't
      attempt to coordinate their work.  XML schema design can be  
      like planting pine trees:  they grow fast and kill every
      other plant in their vicinity, and like planting Kudzu, can
      become so entwined it takes fire to kill off the surface
      growth, and poison so strong to kill the roots, nothing
      else grows there.  
       
      In other words, don't create complex barriers to competition; enable simple
      bridges to allies.    HumanML should be a simple bridge.
       
      HumanML concerns itself with the "human" aspects
      of communication, but that will be insufficient circumscription 
      since anything done with markup has a human aspect.
      I suspect we will find the sweet spot in the
      markup and authoring of genre at the high
      organizational end, and gestures at the primitives
      with emotional states being the middle level
      Unlike TEI, we are not exclusively focused on
      texts; we are taking on the challenge of emotional
      descriptions to enable transformation into
      rendered versions and annotation for stored
      versions.   In short, provide a trusted means to
      markup the interpretive process.
       
      o  Reduce miscommunication through a
      standard framework of referents to descriptions
      of emotional states
       
      o  Enhance communication by enabling emotional
      states to be identified and used to query if requests and
      responses do not conform to predicted ranges for
      sequence and frequency within a genre.
       
      o  Create communication through authoring tools
      that use genre-based schema to organize sequences
      and frequencies of emotional expressions
       
      If we plan to do less, we will have less to do.

      Len
      http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

      Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
      Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga [mailto:rkthunga@...]
      Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 10:42 AM
      To: humanmarkup@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [humanmarkup] HumanMarkup and other Initiatives

       
      We are starting out by creating a focused framework, which Len will be providing through the first draft schema for.  >From the article on language creation that he provided, there seem to be two crucial points 1) A hastily designed new language could cause irreparable problems later on as the language develops 2) the *design pattern* for the growth of a language is more important than the *actual development of the language* itself.
       
      This initial Schema would provide the basic design set for future growth into a broad set of initialtves.  There are a lot of possible directions under the humanmarkup scope--all of them are focused around this single purpose. It would be beneficial for interested parties within these initiatives could be able to lead discussion in the future on how to inculcate human characteristics within the various current XML initiatives.
       
      Here is a working list to start with:
       
      ================
      HumanMarkup
       
      PURPOSE:  reduce human miscommunication and enrich human communication, through XML
       
      Interrelations with other endeavors:
       
      Text Encoding Initiative:  Embed human characteristics within the framework of encoding meta-information in the written word. 
         
      FLBC/KQML (formal language for business communication): 
      Interact with current agent based systems for communication, to possibly integrate their standards in communication, or vice versa.
       
      WAI: 
      -Provide standards for textual/non-textual conveyance of human qualities through markup
      -Provide standard paradigms for communication settings
      -Create a data model for communication constructs, including 'purpose', 'main-point', and 'to-do'
       
      Semantic Web
      Embed semantic information relating to the human qualities of the communication
      -eg.  how do the main points in the speaker's statements correlate to his argument
      -eg.  what is the emotional force behind the 'warning' the speaker gave regarding failure to perform
      -eg.  what are the questions that the supervisor asked of us
       
      XML Fragment Interchange:
      -How to address communication scenarios in which there are no formally defined scenario or genre
         (ex.  a passing 'shout out', a casual 'whisper', or a glance from afar)
       
      RDF:  Formally provide a description of the communicators, the setting (or genre), and the formal purpose of each communication session
       
      XML Protocol:  Provide a system of communicating human thoughts and ideas through the same request/response systems currently used in system-system communications.
       
      XML Query: Determine various ways to extract a particular message out of a communication string
         e.g.  Did George Bush really answer the question as to whether he was going to raise taxes...if so, what did he say?
         e.g.  Which times did the opponent answer all the questions...which time did the opponent dodge the questions?
       
       
       
       
      Regards,
      Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
      rkthunga@...


      To unsubscribe send an email to:
      humanmarkup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • Sean B. Palmer
      ... RDF may be an opinion, but the triples model isn t. That s an important point to note: XML RDF isn t the only form of RDF. HuML could be integrated into
      Message 2 of 11 , Feb 26, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        > For all of its formality, an RDF is an opinion and so
        > is a schema.

        RDF may be an opinion, but the triples model isn't. That's an
        important point to note: XML RDF isn't the only form of RDF. HuML
        could be integrated into the mix of schemata and syntax models in such
        a variety of manners, that it is important to keep a check on it, but
        I think basically you don't want to be too constraining.

        Anyway, all abstractions... when can I start feeding some HuML terms
        into SWAG?

        --
        Kindest Regards,
        Sean B. Palmer
        @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
        [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
      • Bullard, Claude L (Len)
        The triples are grammar for making an assertion, yes? As to proving an assertion? Is there a point I am missing there? There is no way out of the hermaneutic
        Message 3 of 11 , Feb 26, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          The triples are grammar for making an assertion, yes?
          As to proving an assertion? Is there a point I
          am missing there?

          There is no way out of the hermaneutic circle of
          interpretation. Again, it should not concern us.
          Going in a priori, we state categorically HumanML
          is just another system. Constraining it IS the
          immediate challenge. Schemas want roots.

          Results? You want results??? :-)

          Len
          http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

          Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
          Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


          -----Original Message-----
          From: Sean B. Palmer [mailto:sean@...]
          Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 11:23 AM
          To: humanmarkup@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [humanmarkup] HumanMarkup and other Initiatives


          > For all of its formality, an RDF is an opinion and so
          > is a schema.

          RDF may be an opinion, but the triples model isn't. That's an
          important point to note: XML RDF isn't the only form of RDF. HuML
          could be integrated into the mix of schemata and syntax models in such
          a variety of manners, that it is important to keep a check on it, but
          I think basically you don't want to be too constraining.

          Anyway, all abstractions... when can I start feeding some HuML terms
          into SWAG?
        • Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
          We can think of this both a 1) Human Markup Language schema and a 2) HumanMarkup initiative. HuML as a schema has a fixed a specific set of
          Message 4 of 11 , Feb 26, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            We can think of this both a 1) 'Human Markup Language schema' and a 2) 'HumanMarkup' initiative.  HuML as a schema has a fixed a specific set of objectives--initially.  The humanmarkup initiative will involve broader sets of initiatives--not necessarily guidelines trying to compete against other endeavors, but principles that can build be utilized *within* other endeavors.  There are a wide variety of schemas and syntaxes that many of these principles can be developed into. 
             
            We will have to constrain (or rather focus) efforts in the short term in terms of developing the Schema itself, but without limiting the extensibility to other 'human' modules or XML initiatives.  Further, as this initiative grows, bridges will naturally form, common interfaces will be established. 
             
            This is not to say that we are running in ten different directions at once, trying to claim territory other initiatives already have staked.  It is simply to say that the concept of inculcating human traits within markup is broader than the *initial* design of 'HumanML schema', and can extend into other initiatives as part of the 'HumanMarkup initiative'
             
            I think there is no disagreement...just different degrees.  However, a couple of comments below:
             
            To integrate with
            the other initiatives, we have to cleanly keep our framework
            inside a boundary for precisely what it describes and don't
            attempt to coordinate their work....
             
            ...In other words, don't create complex barriers to competition; enable simple
            bridges to allies.    HumanML should be a simple bridge.
             
            We will certainly allow other ideas to come from other initiatives, and how to inculcate 'humanmarkup' concepts within the initiatives of others.  By no means will we try to compete with other initiatives on their terms, of course.
             
            Unlike TEI, we are not exclusively focused on
            texts; we are taking on the challenge of emotional
            descriptions to enable transformation into
            rendered versions and annotation for stored
            versions.   In short, provide a trusted means to
            markup the interpretive process.
             
            If we can focus on the elements of communication itself, that will be very helpful. 
             
            o  Reduce miscommunication through a
            standard framework of referents to descriptions
            of emotional states
             
            o  Enhance communication by enabling emotional
            states to be identified and used to query if requests and
            responses do not conform to predicted ranges for
            sequence and frequency within a genre.
             
            o  Create communication through authoring tools
            that use genre-based schema to organize sequences
            and frequencies of emotional expressions
             
            Sounds like a clear solid guidelines.  Two fundamental points to add:
             
            1) Instead of the term 'emotional' states, it would be more appropriate to think of 'human' states.  When describing humanmarkup, probably 'human' may be too general a word...but we can think of these as relating to our implicit states/traits as relating to communication, including attitude, intent, and flexibility.  This is important to take into account various characteristics including personality, openmindedness, and intent.  
             
            2) It is essential, based on the purpose of humanmarkup, to address some of the key roots of human miscommunication as it relates to the functional units within the speech, relating explicitly to the actual type of request or response presented or sought (eg.  command, question, rationale, explanation, summary).  To have referents tie in with 'human' traits such as 'anger' or 'intent' would be quite useful.  These units may be thought of as the verbal analogue to 'gestures', representing tokens of an internal human state.
             
            =====================
            Regards,
            Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
             
          • Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
            ... What type of terms are you referring to...you mean actual communication constructs? ==================== Regards, Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
            Message 5 of 11 , Feb 26, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              <sean>
              > Anyway, all abstractions... when can I start feeding some HuML terms
              > into SWAG?
              </sean>

              What type of terms are you referring to...you mean actual communication
              constructs?


              ====================
              Regards,
              Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
              rkthunga@...
            • Sean B. Palmer
              [I m CC ing this to SWAG-DEV... for those of you who haven t got a clue what I m talking about, I m discussing adding the HuML http://www.humanmarkup.org/ )
              Message 6 of 11 , Feb 26, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                [I'm CC'ing this to SWAG-DEV... for those of you who haven't got a
                clue what I'm talking about, I'm discussing adding the HuML
                http://www.humanmarkup.org/ ) vocabulary to SWAG.]

                <ranjeethism>
                > What type of terms are you referring to...you mean actual
                > communication constructs?
                </ranjeethism>

                Anything that has a URI and associated semantics. The use of the word
                "term" in the SWAG [1] context should be explained somewhere down the
                bottom of our WhatIsSW page [2], but it's probably out of date.

                A term is an RDF predicate (and hence subject/object I suppose),
                simply put, but this could be any part of the "HuML vocabulary" - we
                can worry about getting it into neat syntaxes like RDF later.

                [1] http://purl.org/swag/
                [2] http://purl.org/swag/whatIsSW

                --
                Kindest Regards,
                Sean B. Palmer
                @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
                [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
              • Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
                ... Until it finally becomes obvious that apparent reality is simply a collective set of all interpretations. ;) ... Agreed. Now,
                Message 7 of 11 , Feb 27, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  <len>
                  > There is no way out of the hermaneutic circle of
                  > interpretation.
                  </len>

                  Until it finally becomes obvious that apparent 'reality' is simply a
                  collective set of all interpretations. ;)

                  <len>
                  >Again, it should not concern us.
                  </len>
                  Agreed.

                  Now, we will wait with bated breath for a first draft schema from Len :-).



                  ====================
                  Regards
                  Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
                  rkthunga@...
                • Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
                  We probably would be in a better position after produce terms for SWAG after we determine the organizational levels in our upcoming first draft schema.
                  Message 8 of 11 , Feb 27, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    We probably would be in a better position after produce terms for SWAG after
                    we determine the organizational levels in our upcoming first draft schema.

                    Nonetheless, all SWAG members are invited to join the discussion:
                    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humanmarkup.

                    ====================
                    Regards,
                    Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
                    rkthunga@...




                    > A term is an RDF predicate (and hence subject/object I suppose),
                    > simply put, but this could be any part of the "HuML vocabulary" - we
                    > can worry about getting it into neat syntaxes like RDF later.
                    >
                    > [1] http://purl.org/swag/
                    > [2] http://purl.org/swag/whatIsSW
                    >
                    > --
                    > Kindest Regards,
                    > Sean B. Palmer
                    > @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
                    > [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
                    >
                    >
                    > To unsubscribe send an email to:
                    > humanmarkup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    >
                  • Bullard, Claude L (Len)
                    Or systems to interpret with. A markup language is just another system. What s the bait? Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa
                    Message 9 of 11 , Feb 27, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Or systems to interpret with. A markup language
                      is just another system.

                      What's the bait?

                      Len
                      http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

                      Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
                      Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga [mailto:rkthunga@...]
                      Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 9:24 AM
                      To: humanmarkup@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [humanmarkup] HumanMarkup and other Initiatives



                      <len>
                      > There is no way out of the hermaneutic circle of
                      > interpretation.
                      </len>

                      Until it finally becomes obvious that apparent 'reality' is simply a
                      collective set of all interpretations. ;)

                      <len>
                      >Again, it should not concern us.
                      </len>
                      Agreed.

                      Now, we will wait with bated breath for a first draft schema from Len :-).



                      ====================
                      Regards
                      Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga
                      rkthunga@...


                      To unsubscribe send an email to:
                      humanmarkup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    • Bullard, Claude L (Len)
                      Don t wait for the schema. Discuss the topics for the schema. Getting in a hurry for the terms without the conditions is a bit dicey unless we look into what
                      Message 10 of 11 , Feb 27, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Don't wait for the schema. Discuss the topics for the schema. Getting in a
                        hurry
                        for the terms without the conditions is a bit dicey unless we look into
                        what others have done to organize communications and interpretations.
                        For the sake of keeping this together, if important discussions are
                        occurring
                        on swag-dev, cross-post.

                        Collect and categorize gestural sets. Perhaps, start with the smileys and
                        attempt to write simple element definitions and descriptions for these. I
                        think
                        you will find the online discussion of that illuminating as you attempt to
                        group them.

                        From the research, here are some topics of discussion.

                        Take as a given that both human communication and human miscommunication
                        can be described in terms of the interpretation of the
                        codes used. Understanding a sign involves applying the rules
                        of an appropriate code which is familiar to the interpreter

                        To begin with, separate the lists into verbal and non-verbal
                        signs. Leave verbal alone for awhile. It isn't that it
                        isn't important, it is just deuce hard to make pointy brackets
                        and equal signs when we speak unless we pantomime well.

                        Separate the non-verbal signs into these primary code types:

                        o proxemic: spatial relationships (how close to the
                        person do you stand when speaking, do you stand over
                        them, etc.)

                        o haptic: overt physical gestures (handshake, smiles, etc)

                        o kinsesic: non-overt physical gestures such as maintaining
                        eye contact

                        o artifacts: clothing, jewelry, makeup, etc.

                        o textual/graphic: any written or drawn sign.

                        Determine other relationships or qualities:

                        chronemics: time management (is communication scheduled,
                        casual, and what is the relationship to communication events
                        in time - monochronic: one thing at a time, polychronic: several
                        things at one time, should be the right things

                        Consider the operators and grouping types:

                        syntax - are groups of signs organized into order THIS AND THIS AND THIS
                        (transforms: addition, deletion)
                        paradigm - are groups organized for choice THIS OR THIS OR THIS (transforms:
                        substitution, transposition)
                        rules - are rules required to create proper groups (different from
                        schematization because these are
                        operators for interpreters)

                        In the lists of signs, make lists of oppositions. These lists are of two
                        types:

                        o oppositions (logical 'contradictories'): mutually exclusive terms (e.g.
                        alive/dead, where 'not alive'
                        can only be 'dead'); essentially, digital

                        o antonyms (logical 'contraries'): terms which are comparatively graded on
                        the same implicit
                        dimension (e.g. good/bad, where 'not good' is not necessarily 'bad');
                        essentially, analogical

                        Determine if the sign is:

                        o Denotative: explicitly names an object
                        o Connotative: creates a list or range of choices

                        Do you need a cultural attribute or referent to denote the interpretation?

                        Is the communication a rhetorical trope: metaphor, metonym, synedoche, or
                        ironic?

                        Len
                        http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

                        Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
                        Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga [mailto:rkthunga@...]

                        We probably would be in a better position after produce terms for SWAG after
                        we determine the organizational levels in our upcoming first draft schema.

                        Nonetheless, all SWAG members are invited to join the discussion:
                        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humanmarkup.
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.