Subject: Re: [lojban] word for "www" (was: Archive location.)

From: Robert LeChevalier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:17:03 -0400

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 [email-masked]
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