Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of almikes@aol.com designates 205.188.109.202 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.188.109.202;
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:53:29 +0100
From: Wuzzy <almikes@aol.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Quoting with ZOI can be ambigious
Message-ID: <20140112145329.3d8ad8c3@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2epqv8LrXhVGQ7PVWvSbB1n5WoEqsO+mkid48Vh0Np9=Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20140110185840.22249c17@aol.com>
	<CAO7tK2epqv8LrXhVGQ7PVWvSbB1n5WoEqsO+mkid48Vh0Np9=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 11:00:27 -0200
Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> (2) and (3) are not possible interpretations, because the initial
> delimiter word must be followed by a pause (represented either by a
> space or by a dot) and the final delimiter word must be preceded by a
> pause (represented by either a space or a dot).
But dots are entirely optional.
Please show me the part of the Reference Grammar where it says that a
space represents a pause.
I really don=92t believe this, otherwise, texts =93i se ni'i bo=94 would be
equivalent to =93i.se.ni'i.bo=94

If you think you know how to quote correctly, please show me how the
following strings are quoted unambigiously using =93zoi=94:
(1) =93=94
(2) =93.=94
(3) =93..=94
(4) =93. .=94
(4) =93 =94
(5) =93  =94
(6) =93 . =94
Also show me how you came up with the examples and show me how I can
reconstruct that using the existing rules.

> So the character
> immediately after the initial delimiter word (which has to be either
> a period or a space) is not part of the quote, and the same applies
> to the character right in front of the final delimiter word.
>=20
> You don't really need to make the dot mandatory, you can just say
> that the character immediately following the initial delimiter and
> the one immediately preceding the final delimiter are not part of the
> quote. That character must always be either a space or a dot. It is
> also not necessary to require that the character be repeated when you
> want to quote the empty string.
Well, I suggested to make points mandatory for readability. I think
permittings spaces, too would make it slightly more difficult to tell
where the string starts and where it ends. Also it would permit strange
constructions like one delimeter has a dot while the other one has a
space.
But your variant of the proposal seems (!) okay as well. I am now
arguing more from a practical than from a grammatical point of view.

But no matter how it is going to be addressed, it at least has to be
addressed. At the end of the day, I really want to see a clarification
in the Reference Grammar. The most important thing to me is to have a
clarification, less important are style issues.

Greetings!
--=20
Wuzzy
XMPP: Wuzzy2@jabber.ccc.de
E-Mail: wuzzy2@mail.ru

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.