On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Ross Ogilvie
<oges007@gmail.com> wrote:
However, if we can find a solution that works for all humans, then we have a solution that works for all men.
Hence, figuring out how this works for texts means we have figured out how it works for sentences.
mi'e ros
My point is, .xorxes. is over-generalizing. The concept that is 'text' is extremely variable. Many thing are 'text's. Twitter posts, Stela's radio show, the Berenstein Bears books, this thread, a conversation.
On the other hand, a jufra (sentence) is /not/ variable. A jufra is always the content between to (unquoted) [selma'o I]. While a jufra in itself is highly variable in both content and length, what constitutes a single jufra is a constant. This entire discussion began from my observation that I interpret:
A: mi nelci lo blanu gerku
B: .ienai .i ta ba'e na blanu
To mean that B is disagreeing that it is a dog {gerku.ienai}, because to me, if a speaker does not begin with [selma'o I], that means the speaker is continuing the previous speaker's jufra.
.xorxes. decided to (unintentionally, I'm sure) muddy the waters by bringing up the whole concept of 'text's.
Unambiguously determining whether one text is a continuation of a previous text or a new one is both (likely) NP-hard and (IMO) completely unimportant, due to the highly variable nature of the concept of 'text' itself.
OTOH, unambiguously determining whether an utterance is a continuation of a previous jufra or a new one is, in nearly every instance, as easy as not omitting {.i}.
Except in such cases, as .xorxes. has pointed out, where the {.i} would be quoted by the previous utterance if it were assumed to be continuing, necessitating the use of a "explicit 'continue' tag".
In short, what should be an /extremely/ simple thing, about an /extremely/ simple problem, has been blown way out of proportion and taking up too much valuable time from many people that would have been much better spent doing BPFK work. (And by the way, the reason I said that this discussion need to be moved from the 'BPFK work' thread due to it having nothing to do with BPFK work is because what I consider BPFK work at this time consists exclusively of the following:
Completing each of the sections listed on the BPFK sections page on the tiki
Voting on the various sections until each has been approved and the baseline is - finally- fully documented.
Since this discussion obviously falls into NEITHER category, it isn't BPFK work.