From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Mon Dec 02 11:01:16 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 2 Dec 2002 19:01:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 96082 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:01:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2002 19:01:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:01:14 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18Ivog-0000ZO-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:01:14 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18IvoV-0000Z7-00; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:01:03 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:01:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from lmsmtp02.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.112]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18IvoQ-0000Yq-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:00:59 -0800 Received: from oemcomputer (host81-7-58-80.surfport24.v21.co.uk [81.7.58.80]) by lmsmtp02.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288405B6B5 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:00:26 +0100 (MET) To: Subject: [lojban] Re: Why we should cancel the vote or all vote NO (was RE: Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:02:33 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20021202162407.GA37047@allusion.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal X-archive-position: 2891 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "And Rosta" Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Jordan: > On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 11:04:47AM -0000, And Rosta wrote: > > Avoiding making mex harder to use is not a good reason for not making the > > rest of the language easier to use. I am proposing (and I think Jordan is > > too) that mex and other stuff that has never seen substantial usage be > > made more longwinded so that future generations of fluent lojbanists can > > decide where shortwindedness can most efficaciously be applied > > I don't support touching any of mex (unless lau/tei is considered > mex). I support And's *idea* here, but not the exact method by > which he wants to implement it. I think it is sufficent to add new > assignments for one or two 0-usage monosyllabic cmavo without > revoking their own assignemnts, and to refrain from using monosyllabic > xVV space How does the new-assignments-without-revoking-old work? > [...] > > > >and instead > > > >simply say that the mini-dictionary fixes the meaning of the cmavo it > > > >lists. A proper syntactic parser should not have the mahoste built > > > >in to it, but should instead take input from a community-maintained > > > >mahoste that can be updated with cmavo not listed in the mini-dictionary > > > > > > Then write one > > > > I have (collaboratively) written one for cmavo that are not in the > > official mahoste. It is on the wiki. It is easily adaptable (with > > about 1 minute's work) by anyone writing a parser to take input from > > a mahoste > > Erm. Lojbab was suggesting you write that parser. ;P Was he? I don't have the skills to write a parser, and I'm surprised Lojbab thought I did. --And.