From lojban-out@lojban.org Tue Jan 28 14:01:35 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 28 Jan 2003 22:01:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 68732 invoked from network); 28 Jan 2003 22:01:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Jan 2003 22:01:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Jan 2003 22:01:34 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18ddnS-0000sj-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:01:34 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18ddnK-0000sO-00; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:01:26 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:01:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18ddnC-0000s9-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:01:18 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:01:18 -0800 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: loi preti be fi lo nincli zo'u tu'e Message-ID: <20030128220118.GQ28812@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20030127235218.GS17154@digitalkingdom.org> <5.2.0.9.0.20030128153106.00ab43e0@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030128153106.00ab43e0@pop.east.cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i X-archive-position: 3936 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 03:52:46PM -0500, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > At 12:20 PM 1/28/03 -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > >Probably better, though, is > > > >lu'i .abu boi xi .ibu zo'u .ibu cmima be tau .ibu > > > >But there really should be a way to attach some kind of clause to a > >subscripted letteral, or math is going to be really hard. > > There is Yay! > >Another way, and this I actually don't mind much: > > > >lu'i .abu boi xi .ibu to .ibu cmima be tau .ibu toi > > > >That seems workable in practice. > > I haven't been paying attention but ... > > If I understand what you are trying for, the canonical way (i.e. the > one I planned for) to express the above is: > lu'i .abuboi xi veimo'e .ibu poi cmima tau .ibu Usable, but it implies that .ibu isn't an operand by default, which seems Very Bad. > Alternatively, you need an operator for membership: > lu'i .abuboi xi vei .ibu na'u cmima tau .ibu That annoys me less. Thanks. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. .i le pamoi velru'e zo'u crepu le plibu taxfu .i le remoi velru'e zo'u mo .i le cimoi velru'e zo'u ba'e prali .uisai http://www.lojban.org/ *** to sa'a cu'u lei pibyta'u cridrnoma toi