>
> > On 13 March 2012 23:09, Pierre Abbat <
p...@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, March 13, 2012 18:52:33 .arpis. wrote:
> >>> "I will be free between 9:30 and 10:30 and between 1:00 and 5:00"
> >>> {mi zilfre ze'a lo temci be li so pi mu bei li dau pi mu be'o .e lo
> >>> temci be li pa bei li mu be'o}
>
> >>> Is the use of {temci} correct here? {ze'a}?
>
> > temci2 and temci3 are not numbers, but events.
> > You may use {lo se tcika be li...}.
>
> jbovlaste seems to indicate that they can be times or events, but
> point taken that a number is neither.
>
>
>
> >>> Is there a shorter way to say it?
>
> > My suggestion is
> > {mi zifre ti'u li so pi mu bi'o pano pi mu jo'u li pa bi'o mu}.
>
> Do you mean {mi zifre ti'u li so pi mu bi'o *li* pano pi mu jo'u li pa
> bi'o *li* mu}?
>
>
>
> > You may use {e} instead of {jo'u} if you prefer.
> > You could use a single mekso with the union-operator {jo'e}, but I recommend
> > limiting the complexity of mekso.
>
> I'll stay away from mekso for now, thank you very much.
>
>
>
> >> I'd say "mi zifre ca li so pi'e cino bi'obo li pano pi'e cino .e li pa pi'e
> >> bi'obo li mu pi'e". jbofi'e doesn't like that; it wants "lo'o" (the terminator
> >> for "li") before "bi'o". One of the "bo" is necessary but the other isn't.
>
> > {ca} tags an event. A number is not an event. {ca lo se tcika be li...} should
> > be acceptable. Even so, I don't think {ca} implies that the freeness extends
> > along the whole interval, just that it intersects it.
>
> True, but pragmatics would dictate that, even if I'm not available
> throughout the entire interval, any point you request within the
> interval is valid.