From candide@urbanium.tv Thu Jan 24 00:40:18 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: candide@urbanium.tv X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 24 Jan 2002 08:40:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 85200 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2002 08:40:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m9.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2002 08:40:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO urbanium.urbanium.tv) (194.183.224.155) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Jan 2002 08:40:18 -0000 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:40:35 +0100 Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban for lay programmers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v480) Cc: bob@rattlesnake.com To: lojban@yahoogroups.com In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <08DAFF32-10A6-11D6-937C-000393074A5A@urbanium.tv> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.480) Received: from 212.68.236.253.brutele.be ([212.68.236.253]) by urbanium.urbanium.tv (JAMES SMTP Server 1.2.1rc2) with SMTP ID 304; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:40:16 +0100 From: Candide Kemmler X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92614944 Hi Robert, Great ! I have exactly the same feeling about lojban as you. And=20 specifically about using lojban as a means for humans to deal more=20 comfortably with the world of technology. Beginning with my interest for lojban, I immediately suggested a few=20 things to develop, like voice synthesis/recognition, develop a lojban=20 programming language, and explore ways to combine lojban with the=20 semantic web. I am happy that, as of the voice synthesis project, with the help of=20 Jack Crosscope, I have now recorded a whole set of good quality diphones=20 (1186 !), which will allow to build at least one natural-sounding voice=20 for lojban. This is I think a good point for the learning masses who'll=20 be happy to cost-effectively train with hearing and effectively=20 recognizing the language. Now, concerning developing a programming language, I am currently using=20 a fantastic tool called antlr (http://www.antlr.org/) to help me write a=20 source-to-source translator from java to objective-c. One could begin=20 with rewriting the lojban grammar/lexer rules in this tool's formalism,=20 which shouldn't be too hard since a Yacc grammar already exists. The=20 resulting parser would be a very good starting point for writing a=20 lojban interpreter in a fairly easy way, using java; we could later move=20 to c++, since antlr is also able to generate c++ parsers from the same=20 specifications, or to objective-c, when my translator is finally=20 working ;-) Hence, I AM VOLUNTEERING TO WRITE AN ANTLR GRAMMAR FOR LOJBAN* *writing this in capital letters for the rapid readers, but I think I=20 will post another message for this project one of these days. It was great reading your message. I think lojban is indeed much more=20 than a language hobbyist's toy. The very motivation for its inception=20 (or that of its direct ancestor) indeed was part of a humanist vision=20 and I think we should try to continuate this tradition. Candide Le mercredi 23 janvier 2002, =E0 11:32 PM, Robert J. Chassell a =E9crit : > Next week I am going to a workshop sponsored by the Institute for > Scientific Interchange, Turin, Italy, > > http://www.isi.it/summary.html > > regarding a: > > ... package--let's call it the "Knowledge Home"--aimed at giving > individuals more independence and power in a world increasingly > dependent on computers. > > http://kh.bu.edu/ > > I am going to suggest Lojban as a possible tool.... > > The thesis behind the workshop is that everyone has a `home' of some > sort, which consists of some culturally defined characteristics, like > a kitchen and bedroom, and some personally defined characteristics. > > The same should apply to computers and software. The metaphorical > name for this is a `Knowledge Home'. One of the requirements is that > it be easy to `move the furniture' in one's `Knowledge Home'. > > (It is also necessary that one have the legal freedom to move one's > furniture. I have three different ways to contribute to this > workshop: software freedom, Emacs Lisp (about which I have just > completed the second edition of an introduction), and Lojban, which my > sponsor did not know I knew about (and may himself not care for). I > was invited to this workshop on account of my knowledge of software > freedom and Emacs Lisp.) > > > Another way to present the thesis behind the workshop is that humans, > in the Paleolithic and more recently, worked in an > > edit/fabricate/evaluate > > cycle. (People do not do this in a world of mass production.) > > That is to say, a person first figures out what to create, using > culturally available templates, such as `bed' or `love letter', then > makes the object, and then judges how well or beautifully the created > entity fulfills its intention. > > In the old days, the `fabricate' part of the cycle was difficult and > time consuming. Consider how long it took to typeset a book when the > job was done by hand. > > Now, for some things that computers can do, the `fabricate' part is > quick and easy. For example, I can now run a program to typeset a 250 > page book in 2 1/2 seconds. Nowadays, the editing and evaluation > parts of the cycle. are hard and expensive for me. > > > I think of Lojban as potentially more sophisticated for a `scripting' > or `verbing' language for the the `Knowledge Home' project than Emacs > Lisp or Python. Those are two programming languages that have been > mentioned so far as possible `scripting' or `verbing' languages for > educated, non-programmers for this project. > > I think the idea behind the workshop is that the non-programmers would > learn to use the language just as ordinary people learn to read > musical notation for singing in a church choir. Although I wrote my > `Introduction to Programming in Emacs Lisp' for non-programmers, it > does take a certain mind-set or desire to work with the language. > > I am going to point out that Lojban is (1) able to express everything > a natural language does, (2) able to be used (with a subset of the > vocabulary, but the same grammar) as a computer scripting language, > and (3) able to be recognized by a speech-to-text engine more readily > than a natural language, since it is designed to be simple and > coherent. (People would converse with their computers -- a goal > with which I agree.) > > So, in theory, if you learn to speak Lojban fluently, you should have > no trouble programming with it .... :-) Of course, you _do_ have to > learn Lojban, which I have not done yet. > > Put another way: the choice is between learning a programming > language such as Emacs Lisp, or learning a full language..... > > This may be the down-side of the Lojban idea, since it is much harder > to learn a full language than a programming language. On the other > hand, if you do learn Lojban, you get a full language out of it, with > all that that entails, as well as, hypothetically, a programming > language. > > I am also going to say that so far, the only programming language > subset of Lojban that I know about Nick Nicholas' Prolog Parser, from > 1993. A great deal of work will be required to turn Lojban into a > programming language as well as a spoken language. So I'll call > Lojban a `prototype' for this `Knowledge Home' project. > > Nonetheless, I think that Lojban may be the best tool for the project, > at least for the initial phases, assuming the project gets more > funding and goes somewhere. > > Needless to say, all this happens to me after several years during > which I have been too busy to pay attention to Lojban. So I have a > hard time remembering anything about Lojban. But I will try. > > -- > Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com > Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com > > To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to=20 > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > >