From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Nov 15 15:34:58 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:34:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L1UfJ-0001Tm-Pl for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:34:58 -0800 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.241]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L1UfH-0001Td-CI for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:34:57 -0800 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b17so2110235rvf.46 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:34:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=RgQ/DX71B0vTpdJMRpxpsfSgUptOkKZQ4iuOvCeujwo=; b=qp81WOlXdrUKLsvwla5yGx7nBPm4FEPku5f+BX8LzXmLPw5OiueL76XyewS8IWjVnl ySGurvlPjxQzOtnDepio8XZZdn0Co4+i6wJOlykZ9y0U9KDKp9XL0WO7z28paGloKYlG Oe3OUmVy0XRL4xnNjcAqr6AE1KjpkIkWxfpNU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=pSuwCILasbrIunE7O7sxxzjgSEbwdMcVh7DdJD2EjYJLAplg1xyCDPisiwNetqkzXf 8grwvb29DrrLaCybxyR794qK3gBBhTAq9VzQokj6CPBX6Ie+WnzWScAcI143gNr8SpgO 0vbteC6bqS1ov2z5vWN9pQzRaOlJCujTyXlYQ= Received: by 10.140.188.10 with SMTP id l10mr1385497rvf.125.1226792094173; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:34:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.194.15 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:34:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d17560811151534s39dcd5aeq729c56f1e30282b9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 20:34:54 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Annotated PEG grammar In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <737b61f30811151245n352f23dala9685c894d991550@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560811151405j69b216b5g1b2fdaed51244418@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 15026 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Stephen Pollei wrote: > > Yes I think that maybe making sure that the grammar can handle things > like the magic words in a way most can agree on would be great. Those are already handled properly by Robin's grammar: (Except for SA, which is still a big mess.) > Also there might be minor things that could be changed that don't > really change things much. > {paragraph <- (statement / fragment) (I !jek !joik !joik-jek free* > (statement / fragment)?)*} > could be changed to > {paragraph <- (statement / fragment) (I !joik-jek free* (statement / > fragment)?)*} > or {paragraph <- (statement / fragment) (I !jek !joik free* > (statement / fragment)?)*} . > > given {joik-jek <- joik free* / jek free*} it's slightly redundant. Yes. In fact that !joik-jek in front of free* is extremely weird. If it's needed at all, it has to go after free*, otherwise it looks like the presence of a free (which itself can never begin with joik-jek) would license a "statement" that begins with joik-jek (I suppose somethig that begins with joi gi... gi ...). And that would be a really weird function for "free". mu'o mi'e xorxes > >> >> For example, why is joik-jek up there in the text rule instead of >> being a fragment? > > I can't really speak to Jorge Llambías's suggestions about fragments. > It seems sensible to me, but I lack the experience and knowlege to > really evaluate his suggestion properly. > >> >> BTW, the comment about free* and UI is not exactly rght. In fact UI is >> not an instance of free, and can occur in a few more places than >> free*. For example, UI can occur between CMENE and free can't. That's >> another thing that should be changed, free should be able to appear >> anywhere that it doesn't cause a problem. > > "text-part-2" , "sumti-6" , and "free" all have CMENE+ rules and there > is a indicators rule that might be appropriate or not. > indicators <- FUhE? indicator+ > indicator <- ((UI / CAI) NAI? / DAhO / FUhO) !BU > If you created a rule like: > names <- CMENE+ indicators? (CMENE+ indicators?)* > and then used "names" instead of "CMENE+" inside those three rules > would that be close to what you suggest? > > names <- (CMENE+ indicators / )* CMENE+ > hmm you did say between, not sure if you can do a zero-width match like that. > > text-part-2 <- (CMENE+ / indicators?) free* > sumti-6 <- ... / LA free* relatives? CMENE+ free* / ... > free <- ... / vocative relatives? CMENE+ free* relatives? DOhU? / ... > > text-part-2 <- (names / indicators)? free* > sumti-6 <- ... / LA free* relatives? names free* / ... > free <- ... / vocative relatives? names free* relatives? DOhU? / ... > > Hmm now that I look at it free also doesn't seem to list UI either. > > post-clause <- spaces? si-clause? !ZEI-clause !BU-clause indicators* > that probably does much of the UI usage soak up. > > CMENE-clause <- CMENE-pre CMENE-post > CMENE-pre <- pre-clause CMENE spaces? > CMENE-post <- post-clause > SPACE CMENE-no-SA-handling <- pre-clause CMENE post-clause > > And it looks like the CMENE stuff already might soak up indicators. Not sure. > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if > you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help. > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.