camxes interpretation

2 views
Skip to first unread message

djandus

unread,
Sep 20, 2011, 3:46:07 AM9/20/11
to loj...@googlegroups.com
coi rodo

http://camxes.lojban.org/?text=.i%20mi%20tatpi%20.ije%20mi%2020bazi%20sipna

So, I'm wondering how to read this -- why is {bazi} grouped with {mi} under "terms" before being grouped with {sipna}? My understanding (reinforced by jboski) was that {bazi} was applied to the selbri and modified it in a role entirely different from the terms of the jufra.

mu'o mi'e djos

Robin Lee Powell

unread,
Sep 20, 2011, 1:05:27 PM9/20/11
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 12:46:07AM -0700, djandus wrote:
> coi rodo
>
> http://camxes.lojban.org/?text=.i%20mi%20tatpi%20.ije%20mi%2020bazi%20sipna<http://camxes.lojban.org/?text=.i%20mi%20tatpi%20.ije%20mi%20bazi%20sipna>

>
> So, I'm wondering how to read this -- why is {bazi} grouped with
> {mi} under "terms" before being grouped with {sipna}? My
> understanding (reinforced by jboski) was that {bazi} was applied
> to the selbri and modified it in a role entirely different from
> the terms of the jufra.

Known bug; camxes prefers the "PU KU" case to the "PU BRIVLA" case
(and similarly for other tags).

Alan's version might have this fixed?, otherwise it'll get fixed by
me at some point.

-Robin

--
http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot
is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false"
is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/

.alyn.post.

unread,
Sep 20, 2011, 4:46:24 AM9/20/11
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:05:27AM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 12:46:07AM -0700, djandus wrote:
> > coi rodo
> >
> > http://camxes.lojban.org/?text=.i%20mi%20tatpi%20.ije%20mi%2020bazi%20sipna<http://camxes.lojban.org/?text=.i%20mi%20tatpi%20.ije%20mi%20bazi%20sipna>
> >
> > So, I'm wondering how to read this -- why is {bazi} grouped with
> > {mi} under "terms" before being grouped with {sipna}? My
> > understanding (reinforced by jboski) was that {bazi} was applied
> > to the selbri and modified it in a role entirely different from
> > the terms of the jufra.
>
> Known bug; camxes prefers the "PU KU" case to the "PU BRIVLA" case
> (and similarly for other tags).
>
> Alan's version might have this fixed?, otherwise it'll get fixed by
> me at some point.
>
> -Robin
>

It's on my list to fix. Patches are welcome if you don't want to
wait, otherwise I'll get to it in my turtle-like time.

-Alan
--
.i ma'a lo bradi cu penmi gi'e du

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages