From jjllambias@gmail.com Sun Jul 24 18:36:00 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:36:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.198])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52)
	id 1Dwrso-0003KN-3I
	for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:35:58 -0700
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 71so826427wra
        for <llg-members@lojban.org>; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=f935uq0pXluKLaxmfMTbcxjdHneexQGDS8Go5N9kdU8/R/0YeCpxVXNgJ0uW0+uyVzc6c98r/0AhjQtn+0VxH+4wYBO9M07TVx7hSCbixa895gaRXOLbTwphVVJ2/1Axue6D+z9/KPsd1zE0HMEFyi7VLmcbQUXEctJM477XH4U=
Received: by 10.54.33.61 with SMTP id g61mr1478631wrg;
        Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.54.68.12 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <925d175605072418357fc3e9a0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:35:53 -0300
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: llg-members@lojban.org
Subject: [llg-members] Re: Supplicatory Model: papri
In-Reply-To: <011301c590a9$95475540$973e0751@sonyvaio>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20050716010140.GU2444@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
	 <42D95380.802@lojban.org>
	 <20050718044439.GE2444@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
	 <42DB5132.1040507@lojban.org>
	 <925d1756050722083624970a05@mail.gmail.com>
	 <007d01c58f19$acc170c0$973e0751@sonyvaio>
	 <925d175605072414283ba9d1a5@mail.gmail.com>
	 <011301c590a9$95475540$973e0751@sonyvaio>
X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--)
X-archive-position: 44
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org
X-list: llg-members

On 7/24/05, And Rosta <a.rosta@v21.me.uk> wrote:
> xorxes:
> >  In the analogy used in English,
> > you can have more than one page showing in one screenful, and
> > usually only a part of a page shows throw a window. When you
> > reduce the size of the window, you reduce the part of the page
> > that you can see through the window, but the page remains the
> > same.
> 
> That is when the page is an electronic representation of the
> physical page, typically in a document formatted to be printed
> in pages (a word-processing document, a pdf file, etc.).

No, I'm talking of webpages. A random example, searching for
"next page" in Google: <http://www.nagt.org/nagt/jge/ess_issue.html>
You can find at the bottom of the _page_ (probably not at the bottom of
your screen as you first open it) the ubiquitous "previous page" and
"next page" links. These pages are mostly of different lengths, and
will probably occupy a different number of paper pages if printed, and
they are not particularly formatted for printing. If you click on "next page" 
for a few pages, you will reach the last page of this particular selpapri,
and if you click on "previous page" a few times, you get to the first page.
I don't think anyone can dispute that webpages are called pages in 
English (or "páginas" in Spanish, etc). I don't find anything unintuitive 
or strange about this metaphore either.

> But here
> we are dealing with of physical pages But once we get
> to metaphorical extension away from the physical page, 'Page Up'
> and [Page Down' have traditionally meant 'up/down a screenful'.

Yes, that was the case before windows environments, where the screen
played the role of a page rather than the role of a desktop, and the 
names of those keys reflect that.

...
> "A container that can be filled with visual content" seems a
> reasonable basis for the analogy, I agree. Why that should pick
> out papri rather than, say, cukta, is not clear though.

It shouldn't necessarily pick out papri rather than cukta. It's just that
because in English (and other languages) the things are called 
pages and not books, then my first choice is papri, and I will prefer
something else only if papri is very inadequate. Otherwise it just adds
unnecessary confusion. I just don't see that papri is at all inadequate.

mu'o mi'e xorxes