sure you can map an object (perhaps a body), and even "save" shapes of the
object and its spacial location, the shapes can trigger anything,
but as louis-phillip demers once said at a sensor workshop:
so what ? who cares ?
somewhere along this thread i read that choreographers have always had
difficulty describing motion - what a pile of hooey! what language does that
description have to be in - what idiom ? dance is the idiom. no
choreographer has to justify or explain or describe their work, the movement
and work speaks for itself as itself. besides, it's not so much choreography
that is important anyway, it is the dancers interpretation of the movement
templates; and the way in which the living body brings the thought to life.
so a question that i sometimes think about when i'm working with technology
and dance is: am i trying to make the machinery more human, or is the
machinery making me more inanimate?