From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Nov 15 16:23:21 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:23:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L1VQ9-00031i-Dk for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:23:21 -0800 Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.171]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L1VQ5-00031b-Ju for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:23:21 -0800 Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 28so2144877wfa.25 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:23:16 -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=MTsjG7gUvIoBR220bM4FVy6t7Je0SvxYQDWXt0CAkKw=; b=OnaXQJMeCJrXq5pzlKp09rvyYL5Z+LIQxk6Qx0IiI3iviHnrnFrtaFJBbNo2pAVDaf 2ejcjmtyKzkLxxIliSPtaCHFiqZr2ra6L6tavw3iXu2RE+dChbO473vn9j33vVNEd2da 7nPUPnjjKvWVK4DhE5i94SYHSTLukq8OXbolw= 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=ZZRhM/0t5mir9P2th3aO9nzmxtAwrIYqu7FSokdfwxN6CMhku21lrZTqy52C9VK/dI w6VB7o8e9/1IJgK4E7bywFTmwUXJ4KSwczuP+N/c5XsZDe4YafOCCyL9o4BNN2J+OGxb pqh+ERdlahjAK5juJcxrw9q8xq6yu92+8OcdM= Received: by 10.142.14.18 with SMTP id 18mr1168309wfn.304.1226794996414; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:23:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.11.8 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:23:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:23:16 -0800 From: "Stephen Pollei" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Annotated PEG grammar In-Reply-To: <925d17560811151534s39dcd5aeq729c56f1e30282b9@mail.gmail.com> 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> <925d17560811151534s39dcd5aeq729c56f1e30282b9@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 15027 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: stephen.pollei@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 11/15/08, Jorge Llambías wrote: > On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Stephen Pollei > wrote: > > 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.) yes and I think the sa was just for some cases like with brivla or cmevla, and some nesting cases. Otherwise yes I think his peg supported the magic words pretty well. I also thought he had some nonstandard extensions as well though? http://digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/hobbies/lojban/grammar/ [[ # There is possibly some wierd interaction lurking with hadling of SI inside of ZOI+SA clauses. If anyone finds a sentence that behaves wierdly in that sort of situation, please let me know. # As a subset of the morphological problems, cmavo starting with a vowel don't work without a space after them in lo'u...le'u quotes, and probably other places. # Currently does not handle "nested" SA, nor SA+BRIVLA or SA+CMENE.]] [[Multiple sa in a row delete back to further previous instances of that selma'o. For example, "le le broda cu brode sa sa le brodi" is the same as "le brodi". ]] > > {paragraph <- (statement / fragment) (I !jek !joik !joik-jek free* > > (statement / fragment)?)*} > 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*, paragraph <- (statement / fragment) (I free* !jek !joik (statement / fragment)?)* I agree. And think the rule I just stated is an optimazation and still accomplishes what I think the intent was. I don't know enough to really say though. http://pdf23ds.net/lojban/Annotated%20Grammar.html and http://digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/hobbies/lojban/grammar/lojban.peg.txt seem to difer more than I suspected at first. I was going to suggest that just about every place where "NIhO+" was used to be expanded into "NIhO+ I?" . I see that Chris's version chops off a "-clause" from the end of lots of the rules concerning selma'o. That's why I was getting confused if CMENE+ was doing the right thing or not, the real rules use CMENE-clause+ which does. So I quess I suggest that places that do a "NIhO-clause+" be changed into a "NIhO-clause+ I-clause?" or a "(NIhO-clause I-clause?)+" Mostly it's so it a tiny bit more consistant with the implied " ni'o i " that the rules in the magic words sections seems to imply exist for "sa i" and "su" to work. I could be totally crazy on my "ni'o i" suggestion, take with shaker of salt. 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.