From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Aug 11 16:03:14 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.32)
	id 1Bv27c-0005Pb-Sn
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:03:05 -0700
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:03:04 -0700
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: The Lojban Wikipedia is up
Message-ID: <20040811230304.GO30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org
References: <200408080634.18420.phma@phma.hn.org> <200408111625.03899.phma@phma.hn.org> <20040811203139.GB30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <200408111659.13332.phma@phma.hn.org> <20040811210336.GF30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20040811223126.GL30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <411AA1D5.6000109@thestonecutters.net> <20040811225013.GN30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <411AA485.5010304@thestonecutters.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <411AA485.5010304@thestonecutters.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
X-archive-position: 8423
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:58:13PM -0400, xod wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:46:45PM -0400, xod wrote:
> >>Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >>>I still think ralcku is asinine, though.  mutmi'i I mind a lot less
> >>>than I used to, although I think it's rarely the best choice for
> >>>"software" (too broad).
> >>>
> >>Lujvo should focus primarily on use-function -- how it appears to
> >>the user -- as opposed to technical precision.
> >>
> >
> >As long as two lujvo are more-or-less the same number of syllables, I
> >*utterly* disagree.
> 
> It's like saying a pen is "a small cylinder with one messy end"
> instead of "like a pencil, only with ink". One is more literal, but
> the other is a whole lot more useful.

"Technical precision" and "literalism" are not the same thing.  I find
the latter definition much more technically precise than the former
becase it encodes more information about what the object does (i.e. it
has more ancillary places that are relevant).

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"