Re: [lojban] Re: jbovlaste lujvo definitions -- opinions wanted.

[Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org>]

On Sun, 9 May 2004, Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 09:44:41PM +0200, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote:
> > On Sun, 9 May 2004, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >
> > > In http://www.lojban.org/jbovlaste/help/definitions.html I tell
> > > people to write definitions like
> > >
> > >     d_1=b_1 bitches/whines/expresses anguish about d_2 with
> > >     utterance/sound(s) b_2
> > >
> > > rather than
> > >
> > >     x_2=d_1=b_1 bitches/whines/expresses anguish about x_2=d_2 with
> > >     utterance/sound(s) x_3=b_2
> >
> > I definitely prefer the former in most cases, because of aesthetics
> > (which translates to ease of reading).
>
> Let me double-check: you find a definition that does not include the
> numbers of the places to be *more* readable?

Yes. My view might be in minority here, but I do think it is more visually
lightweight. Also, in most cases (ie. with 3 or less places) there's no
problem in counting the places, or otherwise perceiving where they go.

-- 
Arnt Richard Johansen                                http://arj.nvg.org/
Inuktitut iis eesseentiiaallyy Fiinniish aas spooqqeen iin Greenlaand.
    --Clint Jackson Baker, via Essentialist Explanations