From rspeer@MIT.EDU Tue Sep 30 17:20:06 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu ([18.7.21.83]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1A4Uib-0000Ky-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:19:49 -0700 Received: from central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (CENTRAL-CITY-CARRIER-STATION.MIT.EDU [18.7.7.72]) by pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h910JHEw009669 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:19:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (MELBOURNE-CITY-STREET.MIT.EDU [18.7.21.86]) by central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h910EJt3027062 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:14:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from torg.mit.edu (TORG.MIT.EDU [18.208.0.57]) ) by melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h910ACjW027370 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:10:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rob by torg.mit.edu with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1A4UZ8-000195-00 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:10:02 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:10:02 -0400 From: Rob Speer To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Trying to follow XXS Message-ID: <20031001001002.GA4355@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20030930134639.GB1691@mit.edu> <00aa01c387a7$e6badd00$42e1fea9@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00aa01c387a7$e6badd00$42e1fea9@oemcomputer> X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-archive-position: 6335 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rspeer@MIT.EDU Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 11:47:06PM +0100, And Rosta wrote: > 'Fuzzy collectives' are handled by lV. That leaves lVi semantically vacant. > At the same time, there is no easy way to say "The things that are each > broda are jointly but not separately brode", so one suggestion is to use > lVi for this purpose. (Personally, though, I think it would be nicer to > generalize the notion of 'set' ever so slightly, so that lV'i would cover > this.) Okay, I understand. But masses and mathematical sets should not be combined. Mathematical sets don't walk or talk or carry pianos; they have members and that's about it. Nevertheless, they are useful in some Lojban constructs, and when used correctly they make things _exceedingly_ clear. > IIRC, the change is from {me mi moi} to {mo'e mi moi} or {vei mo'e mi moi} > or something like that. If {mi moi} were allowed, that'd be great, though. Argh. {vei mo'e mi moi} is a total loss. So yeah, this part sounds messy. I suggest keeping it separate from XXS. The less stuff that is tacked on, the more likely it is that people will at least consider supporting XXS. -- mu'o mi'e rab.spir