Message-Id: <MAILQUEUE2-102.931005034955.384@hylkn1.Helsinki.FI>
Date:         Mon, 4 Oct 1993 17:11:34 EDT
Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender: vilva
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: TECH: local unit gismu, hierarchical place structures
To: Veijo Vilva <VILVA@viikki21.helsinki.fi>
Content-Length: 1070
Lines: 27

>
> mi'e je'abo la lojbab.
>
> >I agree that the x3 place defaults to 0, but I think that the x4 place
> >is required to know what the x3 place really means.  Some may consider
> >the furlong to be the "first subunit" for the mile; others may have
> >other choices.  I also don't see how there can be an arbitrary number of
> >subunit places following x3, since x4 is nailed down as the standard.
>
> On the basis of this argument, I would accept that any subunit places
> should follow the standard place, moving the latter to x3.  There
> certainly need not be something special about two levels of unit/subunit
> (though it does seem that at least in English measurements we seldom
> specify more than two even when there exist more.

I think John's method of using {pi'e} looks much better.

> If people want this change, I will change all five local unit gismu
> identically.

I agree that moving the standard to x3 is better. This will make using
the following subunits so awkward, that hopefully nobody will use them,
and they will naturally fall off. :)


Jorge