From pycyn@aol.com Tue Oct 30 11:07:04 2001
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 30 Oct 2001 19:07:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 89350 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 19:07:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142)
  by 10.1.1.222 with QMQP; 30 Oct 2001 19:07:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m01.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.4)
  by mta3 with SMTP; 30 Oct 2001 19:07:03 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com
  by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id r.116.6db8c41 (4539)
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:06:59 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <116.6db8c41.29105453@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:06:59 EST
Subject: Re: [lojban] SE--FA interaction
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_116.6db8c41.29105453_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535
From: pycyn@aol.com
X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra

--part1_116.6db8c41.29105453_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 10/30/2001 10:04:07 AM Central Standard Time, 
arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes:


> AFAICR, FA numbering applies to the OUTPUT of SE conversion. Is this 
> correct? It would be easier if FA numbering were unaffected by SE 
> conversion.
> 

Yes, because SE creates a new predicate and it is the places of that 
predicate that are numbered. If you want FA unaffected by SE, just don't use 
SE -- you can then put anything anywhere you want it. Otherwise, what is the 
point -- or advantage?

--part1_116.6db8c41.29105453_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 10/30/2001 10:04:07 AM Central Standard Time, arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">AFAICR, FA numbering applies to the OUTPUT of SE conversion. Is this correct? It would be easier if FA numbering were unaffected by SE conversion.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Yes, because SE creates a new predicate and it is the places of that predicate that are numbered. &nbsp;If you want FA unaffected by SE, just don't use SE -- you can then put anything anywhere you want it. &nbsp;Otherwise, what is the point -- or advantage?</FONT></HTML>

--part1_116.6db8c41.29105453_boundary--

