Return-Path: <cbmvax!uunet!rpi.edu!ash>
Message-Id: <9104101752.AA22605@its.rpi.edu>
To: lojban-list@snark.thyrsus.com
Subject: Re: Uncertainties in EBNF Notation 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 10 Apr 91 12:00:38 EDT."
             <m0jQhb6-0002IeC@snark.thyrsus.com> 
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 13:51:26 -0400
From: Arthur Hyun <cbmvax!uunet!rpi.edu!ash>
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Apr 10 15:13:48 1991
X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!rpi.edu!ash

>The elidable terminators make the language unambiguous, but may often be
>omitted without loss of ambiguity, especially when there is more than one
>in a row.  For example: [ deleted ]

I'd like to test my knowledge.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but this
is very similar, if not identical to the Common Lisp notation ]?
(that is, it closes all open parenthesis pairs, eg (go i (is store red]
paraphrasing the lojban into Lisp-like English).
						curiously,
						arthur