|Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account||2018-01-19 11:10 PST|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0000395||Core Inform||Indexing||public||2010-11-06 18:41||2011-01-10 11:15|
|Platform||PPC||OS||Mac OS X||OS Version||10.4|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version||6G60|
|Summary||0000395: New "to be..." relation verbs missing from phrasebook, and not permitted passive voice|
|Description||Not sure if this is a bug or not. The attached (and admittedly silly) source does not have "to be parenting" listed in the phrasebook of the index (in the bottom-most "verbs used in descriptions" section). |
Furthermore, "to be able to..." relations automatically support the passive voice, so "Bob can remember jailtime" is equivalent to "Jailtime can be remembered by Bob". This doesn't seem to be true for "to be..." relation verbs, per my testing. (By design? "To be able to.." verbs require the (he is remembered) parenthetical to construct the passive, which "to be.." will not accept, saying it already knows all about "to be".)
I was checking the index to see if the passive, "is parented by", was listed, and was surprised to find that it wasn't listed at all!
|Minimal Source Text To Reproduce|
There is a room. Single-inheritance relates one thing (called the parent) to various things. The verb to be parenting implies the single-inheritance relation. When play begins, now yourself is parenting yourself. [compiles but missing from index] [When play begins, now yourself is parented by yourself.] [does not compile]
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|Effect||(cosmetic) Index is created incorrectly|
Section 13.10 of the manual refers to the verbs created with this syntax as "prepositions". It wouldn't make sense to allow the passive voice for all such things ("the mug is parted of by the handle"?), so I suspect the lack of a passive voice is intentional, but the manual could stand to be more explicit.
Please open a separate report for that, though.
Ron Newcomb (reporter)
Ah, that makes sense. Nevermind the passive voice thing then.
Er, am I looking in the wrong place for preposition relations? (I'm not in front of the IDE to go looking again, but I coulda swore that place would be the only place they'd appear.)
|No, I don't see it in the index either.|
Such usages are now indexed. They were missed out before simply because they didn't conjugate in any interesting way - they are simply prepositional forms, so the conjugation is always just that of "to be". (If you want "parenting" to conjugate, try creating "to parent" as a verb.) The idea is to use this to create things like "To be upon".
However, they should certainly have been in the lexicon index, and now they are.
|2010-11-06 18:41||Ron Newcomb||New Issue|
|2010-11-06 19:19||jmcgrew||Note Added: 0000795|
|2010-11-06 19:19||jmcgrew||Severity||mild => cosmetic|
|2010-11-06 19:19||jmcgrew||Status||new => confirmed|
|2010-11-06 19:19||jmcgrew||Steps to Reproduce Updated||View Revisions|
|2010-11-08 09:21||jmcgrew||Status||confirmed => feedback|
|2010-11-08 19:51||Ron Newcomb||Note Added: 0000805|
|2010-11-08 19:51||Ron Newcomb||Status||feedback => new|
|2010-11-08 19:53||jmcgrew||Note Added: 0000806|
|2010-11-08 19:53||jmcgrew||Status||new => confirmed|
|2010-11-19 15:44||graham||Note Added: 0000834|
|2010-11-19 15:44||graham||Status||confirmed => resolved|
|2010-11-19 15:44||graham||Resolution||open => fixed|
|2010-11-19 15:44||graham||Assigned To||=> graham|
|2010-12-23 17:37||jmcgrew||Fixed in Version||=> 6G60|
|2011-01-10 11:15||jmcgrew||Status||resolved => closed|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2010 MantisBT Group|