From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Aug 11 16:19:59 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv2Ns-0005fz-25 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:19:52 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:19:52 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: The Lojban Wikipedia is up Message-ID: <20040811231952.GP30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <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> <20040811230304.GO30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <411AA73C.3000803@thestonecutters.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <411AA73C.3000803@thestonecutters.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 8426 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 07:09:48PM -0400, xod wrote: > Robin Lee Powell wrote: > >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). > > Your definition of "technical precision" is based on what it "does", No, it's based on how precisely the bridi captures the concept I have in mind. > yet you vehemently disagree that "use-function" should take precedence > over technical precision. I can only conclude that you imagine a huge > gap between "what it does" and "use-function". What do you have in > mind? "use-function" sounds to me like it prioritizes ease of use over precision. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"