Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncCJ2UzZHuDRC7s9LlBBoEc0NGSw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1P5iaN-0007s9-Pg; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:27 -0700
Received: by wwe15 with SMTP id 15sf1099760wwe.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received
         :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received
         :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to
         :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive
         :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=yV02/KYLkUEZHC9P+b/L7wOguB6t2SExZ3OPaszK8Zo=;
        b=3XyMtRGINPw/aVNnsbkLWleJ4jfxTIO7r36+emAZEaXTJwatt0YDYZcR8L1oMDm217
         VuNSbPE0YHc6LME/etwp2yowSNm1FN58zUsezGmQLS43XwfzwtcTfpye4w9NU7Zxi4Gw
         SICmii/Gm32Z+PJqHStWaPLOi/PZ/TpkRwYyQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list
         :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe
         :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=0UEJSQxq7CknEkKeEbXTcQ8LGICs4DLLJPZRkiyH4YP/K3J3oYiAEQAOx2wUhGLFJE
         +x1oauRUEOAVifFsejitBjjBmbSZdfuu7xaqkkJJ4f8scA7QExqzXt/vgO8ltwXM+wbB
         kuW8P6lVPfIX6Yb6ckJL6z1bc/k8divbBCix4=
Received: by 10.216.234.129 with SMTP id s1mr193711weq.25.1286904251091;
        Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.227.131.162 with SMTP id x34ls63393wbs.0.p; Tue, 12 Oct 2010
 10:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.195.3 with SMTP id ea3mr118343wbb.23.1286904250303;
        Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.195.3 with SMTP id ea3mr118341wbb.23.1286904250245;
        Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f49.google.com (mail-ww0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q27si761755wbv.1.2010.10.12.10.24.09;
        Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.49 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.49;
Received: by wwd20 with SMTP id 20so4381060wwd.30
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.227.127.65 with SMTP id f1mr7357145wbs.118.1286904248905; Tue,
 12 Oct 2010 10:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.145.130 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4CB48045.9050503@lojban.org>
References: <AANLkTi=2R1tYqwGzuL1oLN448q-aB3BHEcB4Z9h+5FBs@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CB20ADF.6050500@lojban.org>
	<AANLkTikJQAkx145XeQBC=f5KBq0wyLz_yd4wgkCH8Bbk@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinFLROKSf7WLn3r82hHVLGUjTUx6VLG=MereADY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimU6eie6HXqfVYWCKEYxBEn=uvyRk+oRbsCSyGv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=5rsT0HCwd+aO+Pyt-2r6Q06jxss0zk2e+B+LE@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimVM9COtdvBy6oH66imQOmMWXbumv3GQjYw8JhG@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CB2335F.7000606@lojban.org>
	<AANLkTi=eC0yrzcPj8DLqRVK+dnzQgt+-diwO0aM7rrj-@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CB253D0.1020806@lojban.org>
	<AANLkTikDa_qf9vK0wEeu-LsGmby0dVg5Mc7aAsMOPCEy@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim5UyGXXc5m0aBySDaUPCXYrBh=81fyRz3om19q@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikJs4ti8DLAJ7HyOrdSdK4yxdf2QTWffdGgLw=S@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim7rNwE0jFa9vuNZoobFh0vpKt5wO9Gw7XAwpAc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikbuZNVhZqs85t4WyWKYmLsxT4oY6a6i38Efakh@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CB3576C.2000009@lojban.org>
	<AANLkTinN-_hvwTXc8xuJy0HZB+Jdsv8ACYa28G72WBuj@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CB48045.9050503@lojban.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 14:24:08 -0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTikWcnRDXowR_jtjOTKSGRoPEwgUjbttRGVt9CBf@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bpfk] BPFK work
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.49 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bpfk-list.googlegroups.com>
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en_US>
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 1655

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wr=
ote:
>
> If we formally codify the informal rules of Lojban pragmatics, then those
> rules become part of the formal grammar.

Indeed. It's never going to happen, but if it happened, that would
trivially follow.

> As far as I am concerned "the parser" refers to the entire "black box"
> program that takes input and produces a parse.

OK. I was talking about just the transparent formal grammar part. I
don't really care much for black boxes.

>=A0Any "pre-parser" and indeed
> if relevant, "lexer" are just pieces of what I consider the "Lojban parse=
r".

OK. I don't. I will try not to say "parser" and say "Lojban formal
grammar" to avoid confusion.

> =A0You seem to be trying to treat different parts of a formal system as
> different and unrelated systems. =A0This makes little sense to me.

The Lojban formal grammar is (or "can be", depending on your attitude
to the PEG grammar) well defined. The particular parser
implementations of that grammar are not unique, there are all sorts of
different things you may want to do with an implementation, and there
is really no reason to pick one implementation over another. Different
uses will make use of different implementations, all based on the same
grammar.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg=
roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l=
ist?hl=3Den.