krtisfranks wrote: > I really like this word, but we need to make sure to note that it is > non-precedential in several regards, mostly relating to chemistry. We just > do not want to box ourselves in for this one word. It should be subject to > future revision based on future Lojban standards, conventions, and patches > which address at least the following issues. > > First, some people use constructs of form 'number rafsi + atomic group > gismu (or zevla) rafsi' not for formula expression, as is done here > ("reltrano" here means "N2, diatomic nitrogren"), but instead for > indicating which element in that group is meant (so "reltrano" would mean > "phosphorus"). We need to determine a standard. > > Second, ".anmona" would be a slightly unusual compound name, and we may > want to make it formulaic, even though "ammon-" is standardized by IUPAC. > > Third, we need to distinguish between a string which is like > "reltranyselcy'anmona" such that the diatomic nitrogen and ammonia are > treated as separate terms and a similar string such that they are treated > as a single compound ("ultranitrogenous ammonia" or something; even if it > is not chemically possible, the word could describe the concept and the > rules for interpretation should be regular). > > The preceding three issues would be addressed if/when any of us, > eventually, actually gets around to translating IUPAC nomenclature > standards into Lojban. > > Fourth, Lojban generally would benefit from a way of specifying "this > veljvo seltau goes into the nth sumti slot of the veljvo tertau", for each > positive integer n. > > (Notice that the first and fourth points combine in an especially nasty > way for veljvo involving numbers and "ratni"). > > I think that I had other concerns, but I forgot them and this list is > enough to be getting by on, for now.
1. huh interesting
2. the anmona entry has existed since 2017
3. there is a -bor- after the anmona to glue it to the binxo
4. agree
|