From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat May 26 08:16:45 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sat, 26 May 2007 08:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hry0S-0004TY-MA for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sat, 26 May 2007 08:16:38 -0700 Received: from web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.190]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hry0F-0004TN-Ga for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sat, 26 May 2007 08:16:31 -0700 Received: (qmail 22844 invoked by uid 60001); 26 May 2007 15:16:17 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=vL1BmAyTSjiytDTDEVD/dS8XIHo9z4dGWPK5Jnq4ieqWyC1tQKlJXebuLtXo7rr5x8Si2RF0A6XZQhDPDqVVaLxS9OwrBb73d6sYAUMeu8n2hl48gok0tJvNBmz8XLnBTEAy8SGy4ZwWhzs9JR6YzPyD9EeM/rwHUJDZNeknbaY=; X-YMail-OSG: .xU9gQwVM1lumuSsuLgG0kkLw95xpegIwce7WFcncQfOGVtGklYChYiB0KrtD9my1q2FI.BdRONn3pPfU3La59MHNg-- Received: from [74.123.21.51] by web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 26 May 2007 08:16:17 PDT Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 08:16:17 -0700 (PDT) From: ANDREW PIEKARSKI Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: BPFK Taskmaster To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii Message-ID: <268181.22409.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.9 X-Spam-Score-Int: 19 X-Spam-Bar: + X-archive-position: 4692 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: totus@rogers.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners I understand. But please note, Matt, anybody reading the page on standards and compliance http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Official+Baseline+Statement&bl would understand that at least some of the texts are reviewed for compliance - otherwise why have it there? Your explanation of the actual situation in your e-mail below is clear...but it's not on the baseline page nor on the page listing the texts. If it were, then I wouldn't be wasting your time on this. mu'o mi'e .andrus. ----- Original Message ---- From: Matt Arnold To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 9:35:05 AM Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: BPFK Taskmaster But as Robin just said, there currently is no process and we aren't ready yet to institute one. He said that we first must finish clarifying the precise meanings and edge use cases of the rarest cmavo, so that we will be able to verify their usage. We must complete work on the standard before we can know if a text with weird usages is conforming to the more esoteric areas of the standard. However, we all now agree that it is within the BPFK's mandate and purview to put this on their to-do list. -Matt On 5/26/07, m.kornig@sondal.net wrote: > I totally agree. > > Selon ANDREW PIEKARSKI : > > > .. texts .. reviewed or > > declared compliant by the committee. If some have, then they should be > > declared as such. Beginners will feel more comfortable knowing that the text > > they are studying has gone through the process. > > > >