Received-SPF: none (google.com: lojbab@lojban.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=68.230.241.213;
Message-ID: <54186D9D.1030600@lojban.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:04:29 -0400
From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" <lojbab@lojban.org>
Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Logos Initiative
References: <e0b23cf5-5a67-4a9b-8db0-7d310eb4116e@googlegroups.com> <541714B1.9080300@gmail.com> <rWNr1o03N56Cr6M01WNtCG>
In-Reply-To: <rWNr1o03N56Cr6M01WNtCG>
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

On 9/15/2014 2:22 PM, TR NS wrote:
> I don't see how a fork can be avoided. I think it's become very clear
> that Lojban, pretty much as it is presently documented, is how the
> language is going to stay. The persons in charge give some service to
> change by "usage" and potential consideration of proposals after full
> documentation of the current language is complete. But how many decades
> are we to wait for that to happen?

I think we are closer than you imagine.  Robin is working on the next 
edition of CLL this week, and I am reasonably sure it will be out when 
we need it next year.

The consideration of proposals could take a long time, or relatively 
little.  If the proposers document their proposed changes in the form of 
change pages to CLL, it makes it fairly easy to consider those changes 
and incorporate them relatively quickly (as well as to understand how 
minor or major a given proposal is).

> And can it actually ever be complete?
> And doesn't the whole notion of "completion" work against the notion of
> change?

If the language is essentially complete and well-documented, I hope and 
expect that the pressure for change will fall off.  Right now we have 
15-odd years of accumulated but undocumented change proposals.  After 
they are decided, then one would hope that new proposals would come at a 
slower rate. If they don't, then any project that you come up with is 
just as doomed as Lojban to the same fate.

> Besides, starting a new project also allows us to take a step back and
> reconsider things that would simply not be possible otherwise.

You'd be surprised as to the sort of things that were "reconsidered" in 
prior iterations.  Look at guaspi and Voksigid for prior efforts to 
reconsider Lojban.

lojbab

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.