From jkominek@miranda.org Thu May 15 07:25:18 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 15 May 2003 07:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from miranda.org ([209.58.150.153] ident=qmailr) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19GJf7-0001ka-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 15 May 2003 07:24:50 -0700 Received: (qmail 30271 invoked by uid 534); 15 May 2003 14:24:49 -0000 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 08:24:49 -0600 From: Jay F Kominek To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Alternative Orthography. Yes, another one. Message-ID: <20030515142449.GB14858@miranda.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: art-lojban, en User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-archive-position: 5278 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jkominek@miranda.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:18:05PM +0100, And Rosta wrote: > > Should any BPFK-sponsored publication (such as a supplement to CLL) > > mention Latin-based alt orthographies? Or the other ones? My > > suspicion is no; anyone have strong feelings on the subject? > > pe'i BPFK should put forward the motion that any orthography that > corresponds unambiguously to the official one should be deemed to > fall within prescription-conformant usage. Many people have strong > feelings about the official orthography -- some people loathe it, others > loathe any deviation from it. I think that these sorts of battles should > be negotiated through usage. xb encyv gebpv -- Jay Kominek If at first you don't succeed, Increase the amperage.