krtisfranks wrote:
> If I understand this word correctly as basically the drawings that one
> makes in elementary mathematics of various functions, then the domain
and
> range should be specified (and probably earlier in the definition than
> some terbri from, for example, pixra).
I think the lujvo is good right now and does not need to be changed.
This is because the domain and range are already places in fancu, and
all funca2, funca3 and funca4 are all dependent on funca1.
Read <http://dag.github.io/cll/12/6/> for the concept of dependent places.
The main reasoning for this is of redundancy. And I think it makes much
sense and that it should be used as often as possible.

You could get the domain and range by the funca place, with relative
clauses, for example:
“ko'a fancyxra lo fancu poi XXX” where “XXX” can be replaced by
something to further spefify the function.

Comment #6: Re: Domain and range should be specified

Curtis W Franks (Mon Mar 3 01:32:29 2014)

Wuzzy wrote: > krtisfranks wrote: > > If I understand this word correctly as basically the drawings that one > > makes in elementary mathematics of various functions, then the domain > and > > range should be specified (and probably earlier in the definition than > > some terbri from, for example, pixra). > I think the lujvo is good right now and does not need to be changed. > This is because the domain and range are already places in fancu, and > all funca2, funca3 and funca4 are all dependent on funca1. > Read <http://dag.github.io/cll/12/6/> for the concept of dependent places. > The main reasoning for this is of redundancy. And I think it makes much > sense and that it should be used as often as possible. > > You could get the domain and range by the funca place, with relative > clauses, for example: > “ko'a fancyxra lo fancu poi XXX” where “XXX” can be replaced by > something to further spefify the function. But that is actually a different function. x^2 defined on the interval [-1,1] id a completely (well, not "completely", but very) different beast from x^2 defined on the entirety of the real numbers. Even though the traces may be the same, the underlying functions are not, which is an important distinction. The graph is some subset of the trace of a function, not the trace of a restriction of that function (even though they "appear" to amount to the same thing). Additionally, in computer programming, such as with TI calculators or Mathematica, the plot range and plot domain parameters are aspects of the plot and not of the function being plotted (which is correct usage); if Lojban is going to be compatible with these computer languages, it must have those parameters specified in its word for "graph" ("plot"). Example: I can plot log(x) on the interval [-e,e], but log itself is not defined for any x ≤ 0 and there is no clean way to make it so defined; your proposal seems to be incompatible with this truth. (Note: I fell into a bad English habit. What I should have said is that the trace of log is a subset of R^2, not that I can plot it.)

Comment #8: Re: Domain and range should be specified

Curtis W Franks (Mon Mar 3 01:40:25 2014)

I would also argue that fancu1 is more dependent on the other terbri than on the reverse, but truly they are interrelated and that is not the main point of the argument anyway. The plot of the function is expressed in a certain set but is independent of the set of definition of the function (which by the way better exhibits the dependency of the terbri, since the function and its domain specify the range, for example).