LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Hans Aberg <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:49:24 +0100
text/plain (39 lines)
At 14:18 -0700 2001/02/14, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
>> The answer is as always: If you can parse it without markup, then it is
>> possible to parse it, right? If you, or other humans, cannot parse it that
>> way without markup, then don't expect the computer do it for you. :-)
>The net is chokfull of people failing to parse jokes.  Otherwise ":-)"
>would not have been invented.  Why do you expect a computer to perform
>infallingly such task and when?

Who has said that I expect a computer to infallibly understand what humans
understand (apart from you)? -- After all, a computer is based on logic
that aims at eliminating QM (quantum mechanical) effects, whereas the human
brain probably take full advantage of such QM effects.

However, if you want a computer to be able to parse a joke or something,
clearly the information needed to parse the joke needs to be made available
somehow, if not by markup, by some contextual information somehow, which is
how humans often solves it.

(BTW, ":-)" is not the indication of a joke, but means "take it with a
smile" or "please, do not become offended of what I say". :-))

>More seriously the answer to your question above is "No, I cannot in
>general parse everything without some markup".  At least not specific
>pieces of a text without a context; and not only whithout a context of
>the whole message but even if a social context of that specific
>communication is missing.

This is what I am saying, the information has to be provided somehow, but
not necessarily by markup on the particular words and symbols, if parsing
is better.

>p.s. I would post that to the list if not some technical problems
>with mail addresses right now.

I made a redirect to the list.

  Hans Aberg