Citation :#17 (pas besoin de traduire, la question ne se pose pas vraiment)
#21 (pas utile)
#23
#25 (pas urgent (les autres non plus, mais celui là encore moins))
#27 (existe déja sous d'autres formes)
#29
#30
#31 (possibilté de résumer la question, plus longue que la réponse)
#32
#37
#38
#40 Mini-feuilleton, Esher dans le trailer de M5, Ages prison et Livres piège (gros morceau), chute du Livre de Myst, Abandon du Live, Guildes de Riven, Accent d'Esher, horloge, Ages tombeau
#41 Nom des îles, Billes de feu, Cinq - les dagues, Nom de la femme à la porte (peu d'intérêt), Fantome à 233, alphabet de l'école, arme de Gehn...
#42 Les deux sujets les plus intéressants sont traduits (mais pouquoi pas les autres ?).
#44 Des trucs intéressants, certains traduits, mais d'autres sans importance. Une sélection serait peut-être mieux.

Citation :Plusieurs erreurs se sont superposées :
il y a deux versions de ce message sur D'ni Desk (l'un dans l'année 1997, l'autre dans la synthèse Linking fact)
elles ne portent pas la même date, la bonne est surement le 14 novembre et non le 13 (confusion avec le message précédent pour des raisons de mise en page).

Le problème de distinction entre la question et la réponse est entièrement de ma faute :
une des versions a simplifié l'original et n'indique pas "Fan A wrote".
J'ai copié le texte sans préciser les interlocuteurs, et plus tard, lorsque j'ai perdu de vue l'original, je n'ai pas précisé...
J'ai ensuite ajouté le message dans la liste DPWR en le croyant différent du #5 en raison de la différence de date.

le message #3 rétabli :

<blockquote>To : Riven Lyst
Date : Thursday, November 14, 1997

What happens if two linking books are written identically? (by the same writer, by different writers -- at the same time, at different times)

<!--coloro:#000099--><!--/coloro-->Even if the same writer wrote the exact same thing in two different Descriptive Books, the chances of the Descriptive Books linking to the same Age are so extremely remote that it's considered impossible to write two Descriptive Books to the same Age. In the "infinity" of the "Tree of Possibilities" there are countless worlds to match any description you can write. There is a chaotic element in how the Book selects which of those many worlds it will link to, which even the D'ni never were able to compensate for.

There are documented theories that this chaotic element is due to the fact that no two Descriptive Books are exactly alike, and that these differences influence the initial Link. Experiments were attempted to produce identical Books, but the experiments were never successful, so this theory remains unproven.<!--colorc-->
<!--/colorc-->

I think that the writer's mind changes the age - a different person could write the same words, and have them mean different things.

<!--coloro:#000099--><!--/coloro-->The D'ni histories seem to make it clear that this was part of the skill of the Art, learning how to put exactly what you wanted into very specific words. The Books cannot "read your intent".<!--colorc-->
<!--/colorc-->

I think that if the age changed significantly enough, the text in the book would change (or perhaps merely fade?), the way the text in the book 'wrenches' changes in the world by the principle of similarity (a common magical principle).

<!--coloro:#000099--><!--/coloro-->No, the text doesn't change, and no, the Link doesn't necessarily change just because the Age does. At least one example of this can be found in the Book of D'ni.<!--colorc-->
<!--/colorc-->

For example, people must certainly have noticed the absence of large daggers sticking into Riven, or the absence of a huge starry fissure. However, with great skill, changes, real changes, not collapsing of superpositions, or shifting of the link to a neighboring age - changes can be made in an age by writing in it's Descriptive Book.

<!--coloro:#000099--><!--/coloro-->The daggers and the fissures were written by Catherine, who's unconventional writing style bends a number of D'ni writing rules. Atrus himself, when examining one of Catherine's works, didn't think the Book would work at all because of the way it was written (see the Book of Atrus).<!--colorc-->
<!--/colorc-->

I think that this does not violate the idea of linking, not creation, because the changes are (relatively) minor, and require a lot of skill/luck to implement successfully. For example, the stoneship age was a partial failure on Atrus' part - it did not come out the way he wished, and Atrus is a skilled writer of Ages.

<!--coloro:#000099--><!--/coloro-->Stoneship was one of Atrus' earliest Ages, written about a year after Gehn was trapped on Riven. He wasn't nearly as skilled a writer at this time, he was still experimenting - teaching himself how to write, learning what works, what doesn't. The failure of the Stoneship experiment taught Atrus why the D'ni rules did not permit the writing of manmade objects into an Age.<!--colorc-->
<!--/colorc-->