From @uga.cc.uga.edu:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Wed Dec 12 22:40:19 1992 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 14 Dec 1992 11:44From @uga.cc.uga.edu:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Wed Dec 12 22:42:18 1992 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 14 Dec 1992 11:53:05 -0500 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5319; Mon, 14 Dec 92 11:51:09 EST Received: from UGA.BITNET by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (Mailer R2.08 PTF008) with BSMTP id 3439; Mon, 14 Dec 92 11:14:32 EST Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 03:42:18 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: GENERAL/POLICY IMPORTANT - Proposed Lojban Publication Policy 2/2 X-To: conlang@buphy.bu.edu, cortesi@informix.com, lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: Message-ID: Lojban policy change 2/2 (abstract in 1/2) I see the process as eventually working like this: 1. We will identify two types of people as editors. Some will be people who are good Lojban writers who emphasize stylistics, but who tend to be lax on whether text follows the 'rules' either because they don't yet feel technically proficient with the language (Veijo, perhaps), or because they produce and read text too fast to check it for technical points (Nick is a prime example here, with his "la"-embedded names, and typo-ridden lujvo). Others will be people who seem especially good at finding typos, grammatical errors, and weaknesses in technical aspects of place structures and semantics, etc., like Mark S. and Iain. People like Colin serve well in both stylistic and technical aspects. All texts should be looked at in both aspects before publication. 2. All text posted, or recieved here at LLG Central will be evaluated by one or more of the editors for possible publication value. The standard will be set low - we want as much text as possible to enter the process. Any text identified by an editor as being of this standard can be reviewed, and we'll let self-selection determine what texts get reviewed by whom - hence the editor-de-jour concept advanced by Nick: you are an editor for a piece merely by speaking up and making comments on the List or in private correspondence with the author. If a text gets reviewed by more than one editor at this stage, fine. 3. It is up to the author and editor whether to prepare an English translation, either colloquial, or word-for-word. Beginning Lojabnists should of course give a translation until they are fairly sure that a skilled Lojbanist will be able to figure out what they are trying to say, even if it isn't perfect. If the text is a translation, it must be properly documented to give credit to the original, and we will have to develop a procedure for getting releases to publish translations of copyrighted text. As noted below, I will want to see a vocabulary list produced listing any Lojban words (lujvo or le'avla or names) that are not in the standard published references; this will probably be semi-automated. 4. When some editor is satisfied with the text by whatever standards they are using, they pass on that text. They will give some rating in each of the areas of 1) technical difficulty or complexity, 2) Lojban stylistic quality (including whether it breaks new ground), and 3) overall quality. Because there are no people skilled enough in the language to catch all, or even most errors, I, or whoever is coordinating will ensure that all texts get passed on by at least TWO editors (if only one has volunteered, the coordinator will ask for a second volunteer from among the editors). At least one of the editors passing on each writing must be someone who is willing to check the technical language aspects, probably using the current parser (making an effort to ensure that it not only parses, but parses correctly), the interlinear glosser, and/or whatever other error checking programs we can come up with. 5. When a text has been passed on by two editors, including one who has specifically checked for key technical errors, it enters the publication cycle. I intend my editorial function in determining what to print to be limited mostly by space, and a desire for balance in difficulty, stylistic interest, and if appropriate, subject matter (as in my desire to include a MEX text in the JL issue that will go out with the MEX paper as an enclosure, either JL17 or JL18). I probably won't read any text until formatting it, except as noted below. 6. Nora and I by definition will have to be the choke-point for text coming in from non-netters, since snail mail and some electronic submissions tend to come here to the LLG address. We will try to minimize this by identifying local volunteers to get text into machine form for distribution to the Lojban List/editorial board. Obviously, we will be doing some selecting based on resources, but will not otherwise be reviewing text regularly except in connection with our weekly group meetings. Nora, John Cowan, myself, and pc, if-and-when he gets net access, will probably not otherwise serve as editors-de-jour, but will serve as a backstop to resolve technical issues and questions raised by other editors. We will thus ask those editors, when reviewing or otherwise passing on a text, to identify any open or newly-resolved technical issues, and possibly to include relevant discussion from the list thread/correspondence stream. Thus we won't feel a need to keep abreast of all text discussions on the net. (I will still archive all discussions that enter my mailbox, but I won't try to read them all). 7. The one other function I would like editors to perform is new vocabulary identification. If a word is to appear in print, I would like to have it in a vocabulary list, since we will not be providing English translations unless it is in a standard reference list. We can use automated tools to extract all such words from a text, and to check them for proper morphology (this is a minor change to Nora's glosser, and people can develop similar tools for non-PC platforms, probably with little difficulty). Ideally each such word would then be given an English gloss, and either a complete place structure, or at least identify the places specifically used in the text by semantic role. An abbreviated format like the one Nick is using for his lujvo compilation and analysis might be adopted if we can get it clearly documented. These vocabulary words would then be printed in JL, but also added to the dictionary data base. 8. The extent to which all this editorializing process overlaps Lojban List traffic in general is up to authors and editors. Comments are welcome (especially from lurkers) as to whether people find the technical comments on text details enlightening, or whether they even get read at all except by author and reviewer. If people want to set up a separate mailing-list primarily for the editorial board, this might also be useful; perhaps this can be done on the Lojban-List machine; list membership could then be open and accountable to those in the community who care. The editorial-board list could also serve, though, as a more limited forum for very technical discussions, of the sort that have occasionally surfaced as the "Jimbob list". 9. As time and workload and publication space permits, I will extract the latest version of all unpublished text submissions from the past, and eventually published ones as well that need to be updated to the current language. Thus the year-long backup will hopefully disappear. 10. If the reviewed text volume grows to exceed what can be published within JL's publication budget and schedule, and there are enough people who want to read more Lojban text than that, I will be first in line to encourage a separate Lojban-text only publication, which could be limited along the lines suggested by the newsletter proposal. Alternatively, the compendium of Lojban text, including unpublished new and old stuff and recycled older materials, could be re-edited into a Lojban reader, and the accumulated vocabulary lists and updated editing of older texts would ensure consistent quality and expedited editing/production. 11. If this procedure is working well, the JL editorial board can add selective other things besides pure Lojban text to its agenda. The occassional submitted article or technical feature, or some discussion on Lojban List that seems worthwhile to share with the whole community can undergo the same process of editorial filtering and recommendation, and will then be added to the publication schedule. Veijo's summary of the ckafybarja project is an excellent example of such an article that might be prepared by an author/editor from Lojban List traffic. In this case, Veijo and I served as the editors-de-jour for the current publication. This would leave me with only the news and production portion of the JL production job, and I would not mind this in the least. But lets try it with the Lojban text backlog first, since I know that the Lojban List members who proposed the ckafybarja newsletter feel ready and competent to take on this job, which needs to be done. ---- lojbab lojbab@grebyn.com Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273