From shoulson@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU Ukn Jul 29 16:07:23 1993 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 29 Jul 1993 16:07:20 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.CIS.YALE.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9465; Thu, 29 Jul 93 16:06:03 EDT Received: from YALEVM.CIS.YALE.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@YALEVM) by YALEVM.CIS.YALE.EDU (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 8563; Thu, 29 Jul 1993 16:04:12 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 15:58:20 -0400 Reply-To: "Mark E. Shoulson" Sender: Lojban list From: "Mark E. Shoulson" Subject: logban ' X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch In-Reply-To: jimc%MATH.UCLA.EDU@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU's message of Thu, 29 Jul 1993 11:53:25 -0700 Status: RO X-Status: Message-ID: >Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 11:53:25 -0700 >From: jimc%MATH.UCLA.EDU@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU >X-To: lojban@cuvmb.columbia.edu >I agree with Frank Schultz and And Rosta that the apostrophe is >very hard for existing text handlers to handle. I would vote "yes" >for making "h" an allograph for "'" (apostrophe), and even for making >it the preferred form. In fact, I think I'll edit my cmavo/rafsi >lists with this change, because my lookup commands will then work a >lot better. I've liked the idea of {h} as an allograph of {'} for a long time; I'm actually rather pleased when I see And use it. I'm not recommending that {'} be dropped altogether, merely that {h} be counted an acceptable substitute, at least under some circumstances (for example, I find {'} horribly difficult to see in handwriting, and {h} is far, far better.) ~mark