From fracture@allusion.net Fri Nov 07 17:11:59 2003
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 07 Nov 2003 17:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com ([24.93.47.41] helo=ms-smtp-02-eri0.texas.rr.com)
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.22)
	id 1AIHdp-0005PM-1c
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 07 Nov 2003 17:11:53 -0800
Received: from fracture (cs24349-133.austin.rr.com [24.243.49.133])
	by ms-smtp-02-eri0.texas.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with SMTP id hA81Bn2I001620
	for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 19:11:50 -0600 (CST)
Received: by fracture (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri,  7 Nov 2003 19:23:37 -0600
From: "Jordan DeLong" <fracture@allusion.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 19:23:37 -0600
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: Question on "ro"
Message-ID: <20031108012337.GA74231@allusion.net>
References: <20031107231047.27542.qmail@web41902.mail.yahoo.com> <20031107185102.Y89889-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AhhlLboLdkugWU4S"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20031107185102.Y89889-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
X-archive-position: 6604
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


--AhhlLboLdkugWU4S
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 06:51:40PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote:
> > --- "Stefan \"1of3\" Koch" <OneOfThree@gmx.net> wrote:
> > > coi.
> > >
> > > Some time ago there was a discussion on this list whether "ro" is imp=
orting
> > > or not. I wasn't able to follow the discussion at that time since I d=
idn't
> > > have enough knowledge of logics.
> > >
> > > By now I am a student of math (and Latin but that doesn't matter here=
) and I
> > > can see the problem. I just don't know what the result of the discuss=
ion
> > > was. I don't want to start the discussion all over again but I want t=
o know
> > > whether any consensus was found.
> > >
> > > ki'e mu'omi'e ctefan.
> >
> > You may or may not find the answer here: :)
> >
> > <http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=3Dquantification+and+th=
e+meaning+of+ro>
> >
> > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=3Dquantification+and+the=
+meaning+of+ro
>=20
> Whether or not a consensus was found probably depends on whom you ask.

Note that this is one of the types of things the bpfk was supposed
to make official statements on, as a contradiction can be found in
CLL on the topic:  it both asserts that ro is importing and declares
rules for naku boundaries which require it to be nonimporting.

--=20
Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
                                     sei la mark. tuen. cusku

--AhhlLboLdkugWU4S
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/rEWYDrrilS51AZ8RAnw+AKDO8aw7HfqkDmw7ax7C04uczaNFOwCdGhFk
TJoXPOkeYDuYRKRSJFoNG/s=
=pIif
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--AhhlLboLdkugWU4S--