Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id AAA08122 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Wed, 13 Mar 1996 00:35:44 -0500
Message-Id: <199603130535.AAA08122@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id D9483760 ; Wed, 13 Mar 1996 0:34:33 -0500
Date:         Tue, 12 Mar 1996 23:59:20 -0500
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      *response to old posting on orthography
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
Content-Length: 456
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Mar 13 12:46:48 1996
X-From-Space-Address: -

Last month in the thread about orthography, Julian Pardoe said:
>This is really only a serious problem with fixed-width founts.  Looking
>at some text on my screen, I suspect that my eye wants to bind a {.i} to
>the preceding word unless I put two spaces before the {.}.  So, my eyes
>tend to resolve {mi'o .i} as {mi} {o.i}.

As long as you do not lose the apostrophe:  a text with "mi'o .i" is
identical in meaning to the same text with "mi'o.i"

lojbab