 |
 |
> Also, way back in early March someone responded to my first post with a > link about Therbligs/labor and I can't find it within all this wonderful > list activity! > > cheers, Stephanie That was me, incompetently managing the auto-reply. I'll resend, now that the dancers have been so active: ------ Therbligs remind me of Laban Notation. Now, there's performativity of code. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labanotation *And* a portrait of a character to which I *aspire*. Dapper suit, mad wire tool/wand/scepter, portentous indication... dude's got the total package. There are notation generator algorithms, just as there are music generation systems. You know, I was expecting this to be a discussion about compilers, but this is better. I'm halfway through Cramer's "Words Made Flesh": thanks, list! --------------- NOT to throw shade on the text analysis! I want compilers to be more conceptual, but they always start with grammar, and the grammar is always so fussy, so that if there's an error, you don't get misinterpretation, you get technical noise about syntax processes. Computer languages tend to be mechanical systems optimized for size, speed, and simplicity. Text is hard to deal with if you don't have a neural verbal center with 100B parts and 10 years of training. Concepts appear in code as the shadow of a shadow. I notice the dancers are not using Labanotation for generative works-- same kind of thing? Laban errors just lead to spine injury? Are there notations whose errors would be more gentle? -- D. Neal McDonald Assistant Professor, Animation and Interactive Media Department of Visual Arts University of Maryland, Baltimore County [log in to unmask] 410-455-2581