Return-Path: <taral@taral.net>
Received: (qmail 19218 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2000 07:59:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Sep 2000 07:59:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.taral.net) (128.83.221.146) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Sep 2000 07:59:31 -0000
Received: by mail.taral.net (Postfix, from userid 500) id 40A7126333; Sat,  2 Sep 2000 02:59:30 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 02:59:27 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: samselpla vs. samjva
To: lojban@egroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; BOUNDARY="8323328-1804289383-967881570=:19925"
Message-Id: <20000902075930.40A7126333@mail.taral.net>
From: Taral <taral@taral.net>
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 4204
Content-Length: 620
Lines: 20

           
--8323328-1804289383-967881570=:19925 
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii

Since lujvo aren't standardized, I'd like to suggest a change from
"samselpla" to "samjva". I tend to view "samselpla" (computer type-of
plan) as "computer architecture", whereas "samjva" (computer type-of
rule(s)) really echoes my idea of what a "computer program" is.

Comments?

-- 
Taral <taral@taral.net>
Please use PGP/GPG to send me mail.
           
--8323328-1804289383-967881570=:19925 
Content-Type: APPLICATION/pgp-signature

[Attachment content not displayed.]           
--8323328-1804289383-967881570=:19925--