I am watching Jay Leno and Brad Pitt talk on the television. Jay Leno says something, Brad Pitt laughs. I realize that Jay Leno was joking.

There are several representational challenges here. First, there are two narrative spaces: the talk show, where Jay Leno and Brad Pitt are present, and my room, where (as far as this snippet goes) I am the only one present. This is naturally represented using two scenes in Xapagy, with the perception in scene #Television appearing not directly, but through a quote-type construction through the character |Me| in the #Reality scene.

The other challenge is that the television perception and inference must be mixed up: events in the scene #Television include things which the character |Me| sees, and some which he only infers. In the case of the joking of Jay Leno, we have a situation where the coincidence group had been formed from sentences which had been directly witnessed, and sentences which have been inferred. This is a very typical construct in Xapi stories.

Finally, the last challenge from the point of view of creating a Xapi text is that the interpretation was created not immediately after the witnessed action, but later. This means that we cannot use the simple version of the |thus| coincidence creation word. Instead we need to use a labeled version which allows us to refer back to a previous statement. Note that this kludge is not necessary if the interpretation is created internally through a headless shadow, which contains references to objects.

The resulting Xapi code looks as follows:

$NewSceneCurrent #Reality, none, man "Me"
$NewScene #Television, none, man "JayLeno", man "BradPitt"
"Me" / sees in #Television //
    "JayLeno" / talks-to #A / "BradPitt".
"Me" / sees in #Television //
    "BradPitt" / laughs.
"Me" / thinks in #Television //
    "JayLeno" / thus #A jokes.

Parsing this Xapi story snippet creates a VI structure in the focus illustrated in the next figure. Note how the perception and thinking actions are in a natural succession of the statement. However, this succession is different in the #Television scene where the interpretation snaps back to become coincidental with an earlier perception.

As a note, such delayed interpretation can occur internally in Xapagy when a statement is created as a missing action.