Re: [lojban] skari

and we could accept some color schema as the default (while allowing people to use their own).

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 8:59 AM, .arpis. <rpglover64+jbobau@gmail.com> wrote:

I'd like to have used {ci'u}, but {ckilu}'s English explanation leads me away from that; {ba'e pe'i} a scale is something you can sensibly represent with a single slider.

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:37 AM, .arpis. <rpglover64+jbobau@gmail.com> wrote:

I agree with gejyspa's disagreement.

{ni'o ta'o}, in gejyspa's example, which color scheme is used is left ambiguous, to be specified with {mu'a} {ma'i la'oi .RGB.} (is {ma'i} the right modal?)

You could. I might be more inclined to use ci'u, myself.

          --gejyspa

{no'i ta'o nai}

My complaint wasn't with the vagueness of the definition of "red" or of colors in general, but with the sparseness of the directed graph connecting lojban gismu.

A definition of "red" involving color schemes would make this worse, not better.

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:

Well, here I disagree, and for precisely the same reason you give. Imprecision is a good thing in color, because it then CAN depend on the individual's culture, traidition, vision problems, etc. Also, as you know, psychological and physiological color spaces are not the same as each other, nor with what is reporducible on physical devices, etc. So even defining what the boundaries are can be tricky.) If you NEED precision, you can always do it, but don't lock in the color words with a precison.

            --gejyspa

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Sebastian Fröjd <so.cool.ogi@gmail.com> wrote:

well,
that's a good way to be really precise, although I don't get if 135, 206, 235 refer to RGB, CMYK or Hue/Saturation/Value.

Anyway in a world there some cultures don't make distinctions between brown and violet, or where how you're defining colors could be quite different, I think there's a need to be more precise about the basic definitions of colors. Not that xunre should always mean #FF0000, but I think that should be what it centres around.

mu'o mi'e jongausib

Den torsdagen den 27:e oktober 2011 skrev Michael Turniansky<mturniansky@gmail.com>:

> We already have a way of describing colors that's more precise. There is nothing wrong with a sentence like "lo tsani cu skari la'e li pacimu pi'e renoxa pi'e recimu" (actually, 1975 Loglan (and perhaps previous and subsequent versions -- I don't know) had kolro defined as "X is a color with hue Y, saturation W, and brilliance H" Not sure when it morphed into the curent lojban skari's type of definition.
>
>                   --gejyspa
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:05 AM, jongausib <so.cool.ogi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> coi
>> .arpis suggests in another thread that the definitions of colors could
>> be better:
>> {xunre} things like, "one of the three primary colors in the additive
>> model, the other two being {pelxu} and {crino}", "the color of an
>> iconic rose", "the color of blood", "a color",
>>
>> I think it would be good to have exact definitions of the colors, for
>> unambiguity.
>> So something like:
>> {xunre} x1 is red [color adjective] in color system x2 [default RGB
>> #FF0000/ CMYK (0, 100, 100, 0)].
>>
>> Almost every color adjective gismu could easily be defined this way:
>>
>> crino green (lime) #00FF00 (100, 0, 100, 0)
>> pelxu yellow #FFFF00 (0, 0, 100, 0)
>> narju orange #FFA500 (0, 35,3, 100, 0)
>> xunre red #FF0000 (0, 100, 100, 0)
>> nukni magenta #FF00FF (0, 100, 0, 0)
>> zirpu purple/violet ? not clear! ?
>> blanu blue #0000FF (100, 100, 0, 0)
>> cicna cyan #00FFFF (100, 0, 0, 0)
>>
>> blabi white #FFFFFF (0, 0, 0, 0)
>> grusi gray #808080 (0, 0, 0, 50)
>> xekri black #000000 (0, 0, 0, 100 †)
>> bunre brown (150, 75, 0) not clear! (0, 50, 100, 41)
>>
>> Compund colors are a bit more tricky.
>> If you say {blari'o} - you probably mean a bluish-type of green (more
>> green than blue), and {ri'obla} probably means a greenish-type of blue
>> (more blue than green). Since these words are lujvo, and not tanru,
>> we'll need exact definitions for them as well. None of them are right
>> between blue and green, that would be cicna (cyan). So how should you
>> interpret these words? I suggest that blari'o means exactly between
>> cicna and crino, and that ri'obla means exactly between cicna and
>> blanu.
>>
>> So for consistency, ri'orcicna (more cyan than green) is 25% of the
>> color range between cyan and green, and cicnyri'o (more green than
>> cyan) means 75% on the same scale. 50 % on the same scale is {ri'obla}
>> as mentioned above.
>>
>> I think this color model could be useful. The color adjective gismu
>> has the same hue value distance between each of them, except that
>> zirpu is synonymous to xunbla according to this modell (and therefore
>> is superfluous as a gismu) and that there unfortunately is a gismu
>> missing between crino and pelxu.
>>
>> Brown is more of a vague, intuitive definition in the range between
>> yellow and red.
>> And the current definitions for pink and rose are false, since those
>> colors isn't just a mixture between red and white, but also some
>> magenta.
>>
>> I think that most people will use the gismu colors and perhaps some of
>> the "first-order"-lujvo colors, and designers and other graphic
>> professionals would have usage for more complex lujvo-colors with
>> exact definitions.
>> Or using tanru with more vague definitions, like sfe'ero xunre
>> (faluröd) or crino joi pelxu nukni (whatever that means?).
>>
>> mu'o mi'e jongausib
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
mu'o mi'e .arpis.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
mu'o mi'e .arpis.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.