From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 04 06:45:29 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:45:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FxlDD-00044I-2s for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:45:11 -0700 Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.203]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FxlDB-000448-4x for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:45:10 -0700 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id 40so1009860nzk for ; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:45:08 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=okio8ly4L4PIlJE/LEHocVWjFjFaEk/fU9heS8kGfgPd2W7BQmXj/5LFKILGwMBSTkVBDhzI2qQHLcC0KD3/CDulT8R9l7lMbRRNVf5RJrbo5w3I/JNDwJsuaFnSDQUc5SXb5FijlJQddWRc0WQmOQd31Ak4kFanUkbS/8qx8Js= Received: by 10.36.55.2 with SMTP id d2mr2559205nza; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:45:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.100? ( [70.224.74.45]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 10sm3610583nzo.2006.07.04.06.45.07; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:45:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <44AA7030.4020304@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 09:42:08 -0400 From: Hugh O'Byrne User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Alphabet References: <44A54397.8000306@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <44A54397.8000306@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 11899 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: hobyrne@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Hugh O'Byrne wrote: > To whom it may concern, > > I adore Lojban. The biggest weakness it has, IMHO, is its alphabet. Ooh. I thought I'd mentioned it already, but maybe I haven't. Jay F. Kominek mentions that ASCII characters were a big consideration in choosing the Lojban alphabet. This is a very sensible, pragmatic point. It has *huge* value, in the short-term. If I'm designing a system with a lifetime of 20 or 50 years, there's no doubt *I* would choose ASCII too. I'm thinking *long*-term. How long term? See the end of Message-ID:<44A9DF38.7030108@gmail.com>. (That should be enough to identify the post individually, right?) mi'e .xius. -- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.