From lojbab@lojban.org Wed Sep 11 13:19:43 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 11 Sep 2002 20:19:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 25926 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2002 20:19:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Sep 2002 20:19:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao03.cox.net) (68.1.17.242) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2002 20:19:43 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20020911201943.UFHJ16428.lakemtao03.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:19:43 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020911160031.0333a650@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:17:03 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] word for "www" (was: Archive location.) In-Reply-To: <200209111659.MAA22279@mail2.reutershealth.com> References: <20020911105811.U73477-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 15586 At 12:48 PM 9/11/02 -0400, John Cowan wrote: >Invent Yourself scripsit: > > Everyone, I've been using the word "cukta" to mean roughly: a collection > > of documents and/or pages. I don't believe that I have yet heard an > > argument that contradicts this by adding more restrictions to the > > definition which are derived from the place structures, and not simply > > induced from the stereotypical "book". > >The place structures are not enough. The broad wording of the place structure for cukta specifically was intended to extend the concept to an e-book (there was specific debate as to whether it should be a physical tome or a content container, and we chose the latter). I have no problem with metaphorically extending cukta to encompass the entire web, but it is a metaphorical extension since the web is effectively unbounded and indistinct as to its contents (is a broken URL referring to some specific content mean that content is "inside" of the Web or "outside", and does it matter whether the content is presently on-line or is the timelessness of Lojban brivla such that a link that formerly worked is included. Also, is text with a URL part of the Web even if there are no links to it?) So if you want a cukta-based web lujvo, define a place structure so that we know what it means and what is or is not part of the "web" it refers to. My problem with this whole debate is that I reject the assumption that there must be a single lujvo for "WWW". A cukta-based lujvo would be the web viewed as a content-space, a munje-based lujvo looks at the web as a universe, a judri-ciste lujvo (order and conversion would determine the exact meaning) looks at the web as an address space. THEY ALL ARE VALID WORDS FOR WWW. So make up place structures and collect an archive of all the suggestions. The dictionary should be inclusive and not exclusive, listing all of them and then indicating why one would choose one word over the other. ONLY if we get away conceptually from one-English-word to one-Lojban-word will Lojban not be encoded English, and the only real way to accomplish that is to have a dictionary that maps words in one language to multiple words in the other. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org