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.)