From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Sat Aug 18 07:25:09 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 18 Aug 2001 14:25:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 77881 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 14:25:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
  by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Aug 2001 14:25:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mta06-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.46)
  by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Aug 2001 14:25:08 -0000
Received: from andrew ([62.253.87.123]) by mta06-svc.ntlworld.com
  (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP
  id <20010818142506.PIHP6330.mta06-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew>
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:25:06 +0100
Reply-To: <a.rosta@ntlworld.com>
To: "Lojban@Yahoogroups. Com" <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] polyadic connectives
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:24:12 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMOEHHEJAA.a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <20010817232835.F15595@digitalkingdom.org>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>

Robin:
> > In this case it doesn't mean "exactly one of A, B, C is true", which
> > is an extension of "exactly one of A, B is true", which is one way of
> > doing xor. I can't easily work out what your table means, but I
> > imagine it's xor(A, xor(B, C)) or suchlike,
> 
> Well, yes, it was.
> 
> Is there another way to commute XOR that I'm unaware of?
> 
> If you're going to treat A xor B xor C as something other than one of:
> 
> (A xor B) xor C
> A xor (B xor C)
> 
> then you've got an operator that's not xor anymore.

By "extended xor" I didn't mean "iterated binary xor" (i,e, xor
with another xor as an argument), I meant "xor extended so that 
it has any number of arguments". If you analyse binary xor as 
"exactly one of the set {p, q}", then this can easily be extended 
to "exactly one of the set {p, q, r, s, t, ...}".

It seems to me that all of the nonbinary connectives we are likely
to want to use -- or to be intellectually up to using -- are of this
sort. Counterexamples are welcome.

--And.