Message-Id: <199602250622.BAA29053@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Sat, 24 Feb 1996 11:26:33 -0600
Reply-To: "Steven M. Belknap" <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: "Steven M. Belknap" <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>
Subject:      html and lojban
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Content-Length: 1385

>> >> >> "sei ti jitfa" embedded in a sentence (this sentence is a lie).
>> >> >where {ti} refers to {dei}, I presume.
>> >> Correct. "ti" was wrong, not sloppy in the sei statement.
>> >I think calling it "wrong" is a bit extreme. Misleading, maybe. Glico,
>> >yes. Malglico, maybe.
>> "ti" is wrong in any printed text without some overt deitic pointer
>> like a pretty graphic arrow (omitting of course the degenerate case
>> of "ti" being quoted, in which case one need not expect the deitic
>> reference to be identified.  "dei" and "di'u" and "ri" and probably a
>> few other words were added to Loglan/Lojban specifically to rid the ir
>> meanings from "ti".
>
>{dei} & co are more precise, but I don't see why {ti} can't point to an
>utterance. (Of course, if you could use {dei} then why use {ti}, but
>that's not the issue.) Further, the relationship between deixis and
>writing is rather messy. If {ca} can mean "at the time when {ca} was
>coa written down" then {ti} could mean "this here thing proximate to
>me as I write {ti}".


So if we use {ti} and various lujvo corresponding to html commands, we
could generate web pages in lojban, no? Sounds good to me.

-Steven


Steven M. Belknap, M.D.
Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Medicine
University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria

email: sbelknap@uic.edu
Voice: 309/671-3403
Fax:   309/671-8413