1. general
  2. unfinished

porting types and traits into exo-aprox ??

Porting as an operation from Moving through an interval that offers a certain change. ie change in a configuration or an overall composition.
Porting a shape like Z simply a shape you see, to a description such as: diagonal line from left to right between 2 horizontal lines, and an alphabetical letter – comes as a movement. We move the way we consider the Z – as a shape, a description of shape-trait, and a shape Kind/type – eg, a letter in such n such alphabet.
These come to seem like approximations from the shape Z.
Seem since the presumption of Z itself failing an approximation.
Can we claim that Z comes as a shape that fails approximation? Better still, a shape that escapes approximation?

We have port traits. Depictions via various means, of characteristics, traits. A way that, for example, a tree moves in a wind, or a way in which a person looks up in surprise, or how a certain cloud looks like a frozen wind.
In porting traits we get certain visibilities from types, yet we don’t say:
We had a plant type tree. We perceived of an individual as a Person rather than a human-object, or indeed a human type animal. We could have gone to claim that there’s a group of human-people who all look up in surprise with a particular trait – and that makes them a type. All qwerty people, when surprised look up to their left, then uncontrollably wriggle their eyebrows in short burst. That’s querty people. However, we can say that the qwerty people also like typing. In case the typing trait doesn’t come up – even for people who do show surprise in a qwerty-like fashion – then these people are of a different type despite the trait shared with qwerty.
We had a type of a thing called Cloud with a certain trait, character, of looking like another thing we sense but don’t see. How to look like a wind? Perhaps to look like you’ve been through winds that left their mark? eg
the fact your hair is messy in such and such a way, comes approximated in my interpretation, as caused by wind – is that the look of a wind, it’s trace? A trait from that force type we call “wind”? We could have had a different type, like Low-High-Atmospheric-Pressure friction, a type of phenomenon that will leave traces just like the thing we call wind.
However, in case we approximate the shape of a cloud, or the messiness of hair, directly through some atmospheric phenomena, then suddenly, I think, we get a planetary imagination. The messy hair, or the cloud’s shape comes directly via interactions from planetary forces. Forces which fail direct evasion from the term
Wind. (nothing against Wind, just pointing to the locaity of Windy imagination when compared to the locality of planetary imagination..