tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Oct 30 03:47:49 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: subject, date and recipient
- From: "Mark J. Reed" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: subject, date and recipient
- Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 06:47:44 -0500
- Organization: Hewlett-Packard Internet & System Security Lab
- References: <[email protected]>
Qov wrote:
> The subject could be what (nuq:) you are talking about, the reason (meq:) or
> the label (per:) for the transmission.
When looking for "about" in a full sentence, many of us use the verb
{qel} "consider, take into account". {qel} by itself can mean "it
considers", so that might work for "subject".
>
> Recipient (HevwI':) could also be whom it's for ('IvvaD:) or maybe it
> transmits to his/her location (lI':).
I don't like {lI'} here . . . it's too vague. "Transmits" doesn't imply
to me "the recipient of the transmission". {HevwI'} works well; the
possible English confusion with a "receiver" *device* is mitigtaed by
the existence of {HablI'} for that meaning in Klingon.
> The date on a letter could be the time (poH:), when (ghorgh:) it was
> sent,or the day (jaj:)
I'm not sure {poH} works for "point in time"; it refers to a "period of
time". Although that's probably splitting some nigh-microscopic hairs;
what is the timestamp if not a label for the period of time in which the
event happens?
In general, I like the question-word approach toward header field
labeling. It feels very direct and Klingonlike. Klingon memo:
'Iv: Hoch
nuq: qep
ghorgh: wa'leS
I doubt there would even be a message body. :)
-marqoS
--
Mark J. Reed | http://issl.atl.hp.com/lab/employees/mark
Email: [email protected] | HP Internet/System Security Lab
Voice: +1 404 648 9535 | 2957 Clairmont Rd Suite 220
Fax : +1 404 648 9516 | Atlanta GA 30329-1647 USA