From a.rosta@v21.me.uk Fri Jul 22 17:01:45 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 17:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from heineken.flexi-surf.co.uk ([62.41.128.20]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.52) id 1Dw7SU-00010k-5R for llg-members@lojban.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 17:01:43 -0700 Received: from sonyvaio (host81-7-57-48.surfport24.v21.co.uk [81.7.57.48]) by heineken.flexi-surf.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id j6MKWIH13271 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 21:32:18 +0100 Message-ID: <007d01c58f19$acc170c0$973e0751@sonyvaio> From: "And Rosta" To: References: <20050716010140.GU2444@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <42D95380.802@lojban.org> <20050718044439.GE2444@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <42DB5132.1040507@lojban.org> <925d1756050722083624970a05@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [llg-members] Re: Supplicatory Model: papri Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:41:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 32 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@v21.me.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members xorxes: > 1- I don't see why the "nonphysical" analogue of a paper page > would have to be a screenful of text. Although that is a possible > analogue, it is not necessarily the best one. When one scrolls > the page up or down, it is the same page that moves on > the screen, we don't see it as a new page with a different > content. The screenshot has changed, but the page is the > same. In many cases the full page just doesn't fit in the screen, > so we only see one part of it, but if we can move around it > continuously with the cursor, (much as we could point with > a finger to a place on a paper page and move continuously > around it) we remain on the same page. In this case, we > "turn" the page when we click on "next page" or "previous page", > for example, not when we move one screen up or down. The > nature of webpages is such that, unlike paper pages, we > can usually fit a whole document in one of them. They are > much more capacious than paper pages, that's all. My point was that a physical page gives a chunk of text that is delimited by constraints of the medium rather than of the textual content. To a large extent the 'nonphysicality' of the e-medium gets rid of such constraints, so there is no close analogue of the physical page. But of the analogues that there are, the least distant is the screenful. > 2- A given webpage as papri can belong to different selpapri. > Paper pages are more limited, they usually belong to a single > selpapri. There are special cases when you can remove from > or add paper pages to a selpapri, or move them from one > selpapri to another, but usually they stay put. Webpages are > more flexible, they can be "bound" together more easily and > it is not always clear where a selpapri ends, but I don't see > any problem for example in talking about {lo papri be > la lojban.org.}, "the webpages of lojban.org", or {lo papri > be la ueb} for pages of the Web in general. This prompts me to wonder how many papri a concertina book contains -- a single leaf, folded. In English, the folds create multiple pages, so a page is not the same as a leaf. I would still maintain that a webpage is a kind of document, though I don't know offhand what gismu best renders 'document'. To this, Robin has replied: > The problem is there are *no* good words for "document". > > cusku is agentive, which doesn't apply well to group works. tcidu > requires a reader. cukta requires being a physical container ([x1 > is a manifestation/container [a physical object or its analogue] of > a work/content,), prina doesn't help, ciska seems to be talking > about the physical act of writing. > > cukta is actually pretty good for a web page in terms of place > structure, but has conflicting keyword problems and as I said seems > to require physicality. Even the place structure has problems, > though; I have no idea what the difference between the x1 and x2 of > cukta would be WRT a web page. > > The only think I've found that doesn't completely break down is > vreji, where the x2 and x3 are going to overlap pretty strongly most > of the time, but other than that it's not too bad. I don't have a solution to this problem, but clearly Lojban needs a word for 'document', regardless of webpages, and whatever that word turns out to be would serve for 'webpage' too. Robin again: > On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 02:35:44PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote: >> The upshot of all this was that cukta is used for a work, and >> papri/selpapri is used for a page/volume. > > Wow. Then the definition of cukta seems broken, because of: > > [x1 is a manifestation/container [a physical object or its > analogue] of a work/content, not necessarily using paper (= > selpapri)]; > > That seems to require it to be a physical thing. If "cukta" is > supposed to be "document", what would the x1 and x2 be for a web > page? A data file or screen display are physical in this sense. x2 is the content and x1 either the stored or the output form -- the bytes on a hard-drive or the pixels on a screen. 'Pure context' has to manifest in a physically perceptible form for other minds to have access to it. So anyway, from this it looks to me as though a webpage is a cukta and/or a se cukta, depending on whether one is talking about webpage as medium or as content. --And.