Received: from mail-ig0-f191.google.com ([209.85.213.191]:38442) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XYRVE-00087b-Kj for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:20:02 -0700 Received: by mail-ig0-f191.google.com with SMTP id l13sf221817iga.8 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:19:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=Z19WmejxAE4bYHCdLt4GNp3zr54nenNCHBPHwSZlk80=; b=Yi8HQ4p0zwynmFq7ptRN8GKP0SwDjOPPidJrNcSLEgtulzUNp+iEJv1VYA4y8Y5RoN EVn7FoigLJcjgmwEEiqoWiUmyGdMqAlfuBugYWJbIZONipAhw/tWV4pKjuiGnT49ewo/ wSO94pEr79EK4hs8NBsmuRCVq+NiDFJTW1phU9/hDXv4hWw1H3RRA5TeD0Kuxtx4Sxh9 g4azxF5gMMJQ3uIujvkc/CDbW2pez5KITAd3Frs95P5H6lBTm9RfxcFxunwj9IypZxcz 82OBapV/4UatKnP+uJ7aLLp3nZfej6U3v8lNv62auFBQOA7nbit8jYaUalP7yjBW0yux TOtw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=Z19WmejxAE4bYHCdLt4GNp3zr54nenNCHBPHwSZlk80=; b=HgnbfRqzb4VjUtRcf7hb1isa4iFm4vZMMwK1kqRnSsHU1woL9qX63VCCDSHeWFA+uG T42wgAKOzi4+MnA5mz8tpzN3S5Nu5P+opq5h2gKgvhNxIWAP6+J3aO4xxWVs6qrp1TbD nJ9RIWDmcGcdKmGIo/jGp9Ea1prRiZ+p2Jx8iNzula0vY77gut5XbVS4W65s8S675B8T KLWTgRz10u0y21dQcv9neeFFZjbGGd5p6P1VBhFNW46tg/H8eZFLQA57c1qB1o8oDfDa Nw5KW4wIdQDOKRqfKYW4oJb/VLi8JtTwihdIs5vvmGjLhCafNStaQ5o416TwL0Fe+Yff gLOQ== X-Received: by 10.140.94.10 with SMTP id f10mr80qge.11.1411960790500; Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:19:50 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.140.40.49 with SMTP id w46ls1807984qgw.95.gmail; Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:19:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.30.36 with SMTP id c33mr361481qgc.2.1411960790179; Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:19:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:19:49 -0700 (PDT) From: la durka To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: <6082c7e1-bd9a-4a90-9cc0-2685133102a0@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [lojban] CLL on CUhE and {nau} MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: durka42@gmail.com 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: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2649_99110900.1411960789767" X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_bar: -- ------=_Part_2649_99110900.1411960789767 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Okay, so that explains why {nau} must be in CUhE (instead of, say, PU) --= =20 at least until we unify all the tags :D. But shouldn't the catalog entry be changed? mu'o mi'e la durka El domingo, 28 de septiembre de 2014 09:09:17 UTC-4, xorxes escribi=C3=B3: > > > > On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Alex Burka > wrote: > >> >> The CLL mentions CUhE in two places -- section 10.24, which talks about= =20 >> {cu'e} but not {nau}, and in the catalog of selma'o. The omission of {na= u}=20 >> in 10.24 is too bad, but if we demanded the CLL cover all cmavo it would= be=20 >> too heavy to ship by Amazon drone.=20 >> > > There is some coverage of "nau" at the end of section 10.15, which also= =20 > says it belongs to CUhE. > =20 > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > --=20 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 e= mail 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. ------=_Part_2649_99110900.1411960789767 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Okay, so that explains why {nau} must be in CUhE (instead = of, say, PU) -- at least until we unify all the tags :D.

But shouldn= 't the catalog entry be changed?

mu'o mi'e la durka

El doming= o, 28 de septiembre de 2014 09:09:17 UTC-4, xorxes escribi=C3=B3:


On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Alex Burka <dur...@gmail.com> wrote:

The CLL mentions CUhE in two places -- = section 10.24, which talks about {cu'e} but not {nau}, and in the catalog o= f selma'o. The omission of {nau} in 10.24 is too bad, but if we demanded th= e CLL cover all cmavo it would be too heavy to ship by Amazon drone.
=

There is some coverage of "nau" at the end= of section 10.15, which also says it belongs to CUhE.
 
mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
------=_Part_2649_99110900.1411960789767--