Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban / Most translated Web Page

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 03:54:48 -0400

At 02:23 PM 05/06/2000 -0700, Jorge Llambias wrote:
>It is not very clear to me what status the recommendation
>to use DD;MM;YYYY has in Lojban. The reverse order is equally
>grammatical and just as easy to understand. It is also
>unambiguous, because the 4 digits of the year make it clear
>which part is the year. So:
>
>{li 2000;05;07} can be nothing but May 7th of this year,
>same as {li ;05;07} and {li ;;07}. (I would assume that
>elisions default to current.)
>
>Similarly {li 07;05;2000}, {li 07;05;} and {li 07;;}.
>
>Since there is no possible confusion, there doesn't seem
>to be any need to exclude either one as a possibility.

This approach would require the elisions to be marked with those "pi'e" 
semicolons. It is not as if such conventions could not work; rather it is 
not in the book (or any Lojban material) that way. Would a different 
convention be a baseline change? Would it contradict anything in the Book?

lojbab
----
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org (newly updated!)