! Short Notes

jaspu needs "credential"

datni needs s:du'u:du'u/quote/string of letters .a numbers:

jbovlaste voting in error: mutpaprylu'a, ckulu'a, rejlu'a all usefull, all words for same type off "reference". Is "reference;with author and audience" useful/good? Except do any of them have different place structure anyways? Yes; places of document word should be associated with target.

! General Comments

!! Theory Of Minimal-Length Word Use

This document attempts to, where possible, develop jvajvo that completely and rigorously match the meaning of various computer terms as viewed by computing experts. As such, many of them are very long (although c.f. German) with baroque place structures. Before you object to this, please understand that they are *mostly not meant to be used*.

It is my belief that a Lojban speaker should use whatever word has the place structure needed and does not introduce confusion given the context. There are not going to be very many times where it is necessary to say samterlutselmutpapri instead of se mutpapri. {la'o zoi lojban.org zoi samterlutselmutpapri lu la .lojban. mo li'u .e so'i drata la'o zoi ...paypal.com/... zoi fa'u la'o zoi ...teddyb.org/... zoi lu .e'u ko dunda li'u fa'u lu gubni datni la .camgusmis li'u la'o zoi paypal.com zoi fa'u la'o zoi teddyb.org zoi} is a contrived but reasonable use of samterlutselmutpapri because the whole place structure is being used. In everyday usage, though, things like {la'o zoi ...lojban.org/... zoi cu cinri mutpapri} is much, much more likely. If you only need on place, and inspeficity about the exact nature of the item you're discussing isn't likely to be a problem, use the shortest word that fits!

This is especially hard, I expect, for English speakers. English has a ridiculous amount of words, and (much worse) defines "good writing" at least partly in terms of using the most specific word for the job. An English author would almost never say "A attacked B" if A is using a gun; they'd use "shot" instead. This is why my current draft (as of 1 Aug 2006) of {la nicte cadzu} has many instances of {xumjimcelxa'i} that need to be replaced with xarci or gunta.

With fu'ivla, some of this doesn't apply, but there the likelyhood of the audience being unfamiliar with the fu'ivla imposes a similar constraint: if a more-well known word that is (at worst) not much longer will do well enough, use it!

In summary, I assert that good Lojban writing uses the shortest, (usually) *least* specific word that doesn't introduce confusion, in the same way that good English writing uses the most specific word available.

!! About mutpapri

xorxes and I have had a long, running discussion over the years about some of these terms, with "web page" at the forefront of our arguments.

xorxes has asserted that papri has the place structure we want, that is x1 is a web page in web site x2. I've eventually come to agree, *however*, the actual definition makes papri sound like a physical page specifically, and I can't get past that. If the BPFK wants to tweak the definition to make it mean something more like "document" and less like "page", I'll stop using mutpapri.

! Document Terms

document - mutpapri (papri, with def'n changes) to focus on relation to other, superset works; vreji to focus on work's subject; cukta to focus on auther and audience

mutpapri - mucti papri - document - smallest contiguous part of a set of documents, i.e. accessible without doing anything other then changing sensory focus

mutpaprylu'a - mutpapri / cukta / vreji pluta - p1 is a [bibliographic] reference / ?? to document p2=mp1 from document p3=mp1 via document(s) p4=mp1 (sequence); (sa'a document- descriptive places start here in all versions) document referenced is part of larger work mp2 -- drop p4 due to relative uselessness?

samymutpaprylu'a - skami mutpapri pluta - hyperlink - p1 is a hyperlink / a document reference that can be used by a computer program to find the referenced document ...(as previous)