Received: from localhost ([::1]:43001 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1afFyW-0005Id-GA; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 17:03:08 -0700 Received: from cracksucht.de ([148.251.217.217]:57474 helo=pb.cracksucht.de) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1afFyR-0005IW-0b for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 17:03:07 -0700 To: llg-members@lojban.org References: <8BCCD0E2-E6D4-4687-9D89-D177E69E1259@gmail.com> <56DE1D83.8050901@lojban.org> <8EC7FC36-8C8F-43FD-AE6A-C704D1D9C2CE@gmail.com> <12678381.nPyR9sEY1K@caracal> <56E0AE11.8020708@lojban.org> <56E1F54E.3040501@lojban.org> From: selpahi Message-ID: <56E5FFAF.1030405@selpahi.de> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:02:55 +0100 In-Reply-To: <56E1F54E.3040501@lojban.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] 2015 Annual Meeting - Old Business X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org On 10.03.2016 23:29, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > For the first two topics, I personally would like the jatna's take on: > 1) whether the PEG grammar or the YACC grammar is the official/baseline > one right now. We, the BPFK, discussed the matter for a while and there is consensus that the PEG should replace the YACC grammar; we are currently in the process of making the PEG the official grammar. This grammar will then serve as the foundation on which further (controlled) grammar changes will be built upon. We are not done with the formal vote yet, but from the discussions we've had it is more than reasonable to assume that it will go through. > 2) What, if any, parser is considered official, or at least compliant > with whatever the official grammar is. In the discussions mentioned above, we agreed that only pure grammar(s) should be official, not parsers. Parsers can comply with said grammar(s), but we didn't want to, e.g. prefer javascript camxes over python camxes. That said, here is an online parser that implements the grammar that BPFK currently uses as a basis: http://lojban.github.io/ilmentufa/camxes.html > 3) As I've previously noted, it seems that what used to be the baselined > (and thus not changing) gismu and cmavo lists have been replaced by new > lists which include a whole lot of new stuff, possibly experimental (but > there is no defined experimental space for gismu). Well, the original text files still exist: http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/gismu.txt http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/cmavo.txt I am unaware of any changes to those files. Anyone can add cmavo or gismu to jbovlaste, but jbovlaste is not an official dictionary. Rather, it is an unwieldy mix of documenting usage and proposing new words before anyone has ever used them. Maybe Curtis Franks would like to say something about the many gismu and cmavo he has been adding to jbovlaste, many of which are related to math or physics. In any case, how successful a word is is not determined by its appearing on jbovlaste, but by whether it finds its way into common usage. There are examples of brivla that people use regularly and that nobody ever bothered to enter into jbovlaste, and there are many examples of brivla on jbovlaste that nobody has ever used and likely never will. > It seems that to > some people, a large number of experimental cmavo have become part of > their standard dialect. Yes, some people use a lot of experimental cmavo. And not all of those people use the same set of experimental cmavo. > Does byfy have a plan for addressing these > proposals/changes and deciding that some are officially approved (and > therefore need to be documented in CLL and on the BYFY cmavo pages). BPFK is aware of more or less all Lojban usage. There are a few, but certainly not "a large number" of experimental cmavo that have become widely used among most of the active speaker base. We will be considering each individual cmavo eventually, when it is appropriate to do so. As a general tendency, BPFK is not interested in making any cmavo official that have not seen heavy use and have not been tested and analyzed extensively. Of course, this does not stop people from using whatever cmavo they like, and the BPFK does not see that as a problem, nor wishes to interfere with that. For some cmavo it might be worthwhile to give them a non-experimental shape at some point, but there are no concrete plans for any particular cmavo at the moment. As for possible inclusions in the next CLL, the cmavo {poi'i} was noted for being highly useful for explaining a variety of Lojban constructions and concepts clearly, from gadri, over scope, to distributivity, so it would make explaining certain things much easier (it makes for much more elegant Lojban expansions). It is also a cmavo that has gained high popularity in the last one or two years. A lot of this depends on just how far away the next edition of CLL is. > 4) the jatna said that there were 8 byfy members, including And. Who > are the others and how were/are they determined (in case someone wants > to join)? I know for example that I am still on the byfy list and never > resigned. But I also make no attempt to keep up with the business, > which is entirely in Lojban. Though I probably could read a single > message if I felt it important enough, I doubt that I have the > time/interest to keep up with the discussion. So am I one of the 8, but > always abstaining? During the last LLG meeting, the membership elected the initial slate of BPFK members. Those were: Pierre Abbat gleki Alex Burka Ilmen xorxes Adam D. Lopresto, aka la xalbo And Rosta la .guskant. Since then one member (And Rosta) has left, and one member (la mezohe) has joined. https://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_members As I mentioned in my report, anyone can become a member by simply announcing that they want to be a member (in Lojban). People who are inactive for too long are removed until they explicitly re-join. This is mainly to make voting easier, because waiting for people to vote who no longer regularly read messages is annoying. > 5) Does producing a published dictionary fit anywhere in the byfy plans, > or is this an LLG project relatively independent of the byfy (the answer > to 3) above is relevant, and I think that byfy would need to produce > real dictionary definitions of the cmavo to at least replace those found > in the old cmavo list - this was after all one of the original reasons > for setting up the BPFK - because I couldn't come up with good > definitions and the dictionary was never published as a result.) I'm not sure what other people think about this, but I feel that BPFK should be the one writing the definitions, and LLG could then take care of the publishing part. I know many people don't really see much value in a paper dictionary, especially if it is to contain lujvo and fu'ivla as well, since 1) those people would rather use online applications or 2) they feel that the dictionary would become outdated too quickly because so many new words are being created all the time. Despite that, I do think there is a lot of value in being able to hand someone an actual book that they can hold in their hands, one which looks professional and which contains all the most important words. The new cmavo definitions are not ready, and maybe one of the reasons for the lack of work on them is that people don't have a clear picture of what they get out of it, no vision that motivates them to do what needs to be done. ... there are so many important projects and only a handful of people who could do them. Activity is all over the place and not very focused. Maybe labor division could improve things somewhat. I am still tired from work, so please let me know if I forgot anything or failed to answer any questions. ~~~mi'e la selpa'i _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members