From nobody@chain.digitalkingdom.org Wed Dec 20 16:17:53 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list bpfk-announce); Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:23:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GxBd8-0007DW-4D for bpfk-announce-real@lojban.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:17:50 -0800 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.174]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GxBcw-0007DG-Ki for bpfk-announce@lojban.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:17:49 -0800 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m3so2261340uge for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:17:34 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=MqFmteU+bug3kGgsLIojwQToQue/Ph1uXQgheXjw1tqkvqGXA2zHY675o0j3NI0h/h9tBBe/cJkd66eaCShW39KesVYIX6KrIAbnuTU3jc9rvODytxtNMBdmxFCY0am6/Q3+PZb45jO6vVyqTbOGo5Pzkt/LSp/6kNZOas9wdEw= Received: by 10.78.18.3 with SMTP id 3mr170938hur.1166660253275; Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:17:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.116.6 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:17:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d17560612201617v56cbee8ag542788839b5ec7be@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 21:17:33 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: bpfk-announce@lojban.org Subject: [bpfk-announce] Re: BPFK In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <458771EE.9020108@lojban.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 X-Spam-Score-Int: -24 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 128 X-Approved-By: rlpowell@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: bpfk-announce-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: bpfk-announce-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: bpfk-announce@lojban.org X-list: bpfk-announce On 12/20/06, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: > > The majority of the language is thoroughly uncontroversial. Nevertheless, > a BPFK section must be written on it, for use in the dictionary. It seems to me that most of the work that remains to be done is just that: write definitions for uncontroversial but never used cmavo. Since there isn't any usage to be found for these words, the really difficult part is coming up with good examples (as happened with the BAI hell.). Of the Sections that are still shepherdless, the only ones that might raise some interesting issues as far as I can tell are CAhA, TAhE, and perhaps something in FAhA and NU1. Everything else (the great majority) seems to require just grind work. mu'o mi'e xorxes