Received: from mail-qa0-f60.google.com ([209.85.216.60]:45594) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TvCtX-0002sv-Pj; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:14:26 -0800 Received: by mail-qa0-f60.google.com with SMTP id bs12sf407316qab.25 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:13:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received:received-spf :x-ct-class:x-ct-score:x-ct-refid:x-ct-spam:x-authority-analysis :x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=u+VUWMwDgAKtQ3GUxOYeWwKFqTfsbZEcBW36VzWkW0w=; b=FC0FN1W+Qf6VU51RrF3ptCav6JD2jOYtF0hVk4N/4IOr0KF5XTg6QR07I9NZawuAL5 Owf82KqcQc40GVOs/ea+LllUFu6Zk8wn2yViXxI1XzxJknF2xAtqv95rT1wyYGmEAL5q UjPypa83FvMLcYOLQ7z7qP/R/dFF1UyiWWQSxDzvP4PMzz/1x+yHOxk+OoGDQ7cwuFUO pB+XKk7MClfZvjF0wkoGqbk1J4mkGC/88g61hs2lug7V6a3oY4KsKpq+cOhd/GiDZHqG 4LklKHHHLP/jnV4+DHsJ1od4BSUXUk7fCTxFwW7ovLzuidrMtKEoz4Y1/yNRwjrO0RmC UfYw== X-Received: by 10.49.127.198 with SMTP id ni6mr16151518qeb.23.1358280837148; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:13:57 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.0.176 with SMTP id 16ls423000qef.41.gmail; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:13:56 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.224.192.199 with SMTP id dr7mr17873777qab.4.1358280836748; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:13:56 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.224.192.199 with SMTP id dr7mr17873776qab.4.1358280836734; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:13:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from eastrmfepo202.cox.net (eastrmfepo202.cox.net. [68.230.241.217]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id y1si2070879qco.0.2013.01.15.12.13.56; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:13:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.217 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.241.217; Received: from eastrmimpo109 ([68.230.241.222]) by eastrmfepo202.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20130115201355.MYQP6475.eastrmfepo202.cox.net@eastrmimpo109> for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:13:55 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([98.169.148.216]) by eastrmimpo109 with cox id oLDv1k00K4gNKFm01LDvbM; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:13:55 -0500 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020208.50F5B883.0280,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=ac/jbGUt c=1 sm=1 a=oMUrf2L0cPa+6Alu0knKiQ==:17 a=YsUzL_8ObRgA:10 a=2hGXdcbyE2EA:10 a=xmHE3fpoGJwA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=Rit9BXzZY_8A:10 a=61PpgebDNuIpeTHvq1cA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=oMUrf2L0cPa+6Alu0knKiQ==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <50F5B884.2000904@lojban.org> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:13:56 -0500 From: Robert LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: criteria for the dictionary References: <88bd2464-6efd-4252-9ff6-7c4f68f79e89@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.217 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 1 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: la gleki wrote: > On Monday, January 14, 2013 4:55:12 PM UTC+4, jongausib wrote: > > I know two guys who are against anything that is non-jvajvo. Whoopie for them. .ionai I can probably find two guys who are against any particular proposal that is made, without a lot of difficulty. [...] Content analysis details: (0.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid la gleki wrote: > On Monday, January 14, 2013 4:55:12 PM UTC+4, jongausib wrote: > > I know two guys who are against anything that is non-jvajvo. Whoopie for them. .ionai I can probably find two guys who are against any particular proposal that is made, without a lot of difficulty. > .ie CLL 2.0 must have guidelines of lojbanising Latin names. Not likely to happen, since word-making rules aren't likely to be enough of a priority to even be considered until AFTER 2.0 is done. > An algorithm (like the one we have for gismu) would be an ideal solution. Anyone can make an algorithm if they want. There will be no official consideration of such algorithms anytime soon. Document them in the wiki or somewhere that people interested can find them. (Metatopics in the wiki pointing to a lot of such things would probably be useful, if they don't already exist.) lojbab -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.