<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Machine-readable data and human-memorable stories</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wordyard.com/2006/09/12/data-and-stories/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2006/09/12/data-and-stories/</link>
	<description>Technology, politics, culture</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 03:31:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Einar F</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2006/09/12/data-and-stories/#comment-170</link>
		<dc:creator>Einar F</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Sep 2006 11:03:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1117#comment-170</guid>
		<description>Let me try to clarify. Lojban is still ambiguous in the sense that words can be understanded in different ways, because different people certainly have different experience of the concept the word signifies. In this sense lojban is semantically ambiguous, but because it is not ambiguous grammatically computers can read it and understand which function each word has and the relation between them. A computer will not necessarily know what the words mean.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me try to clarify. Lojban is still ambiguous in the sense that words can be understanded in different ways, because different people certainly have different experience of the concept the word signifies. In this sense lojban is semantically ambiguous, but because it is not ambiguous grammatically computers can read it and understand which function each word has and the relation between them. A computer will not necessarily know what the words mean.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
