Omni (omni)'s status on Wednesday, 19-Dec-12 21:26:06 UTC
-
@ceruleanspark Actually not. It was made for "unambigious communication which can easily be parsed by computers". I can give you another sentence, which will show that is probably isn't all that bad: {mi gleki lo su'u do tavla mi kei ku} which parses as {[1(2[gleki1 (happy thing(s)) :] mi I, me)2 [is, does] «3gleki being happy»3 (4[gleki2 (subject(s) of happiness) :] lo any/some <5su'u abstract nature of [6(7[tavla1 (talk-er(s)) :] do you)7 [is, does] «8tavla talk-ing»8 (9[tavla2 (talked to thing(s)) :] mi I, me)9]6 kei >5 ku )4]1} (I'm happy about the fact that you're talking to me).
