Subject: Re: [lojban] word resolution algorithm

From: Pierre Abbat <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 08:49:59 -0500

On Saturday 30 November 2002 00:14, Bob LeChevalier-Logical Language Group 
wrote:
> Buried in my discussion with Pierre, I recalled that the word resolution
> algorithm was not proven in time to be included in CLL, though it was
> intended to be part of the baseline language definition. At the time, I
> said we could just add it into the dictionary, but the new policy does not
> specifically allow for that (though the byfy could probably include
> it). Updating and proving the word resolution algorithm would be a good
> project for one person with the sort of mathematical-proof-of-algorithm
> experience needed, and could be done independently, and a working algorithm
> could simply byfy deliberations over what could amount to a raft of
> corrections and change proposals in the orthography/morphology sections of
> the refgrammar, which has numerous sloppy wordings.

By proving it, do you mean proving that all valid phoneme strings are broken 
into words correctly, or also proving that all invalid phoneme strings are 
rejected? I'll code this up.

phma