From 3u2uwSw8JBiMLHBG9DK.DUDQRNMFL9HK.BNLKNIA9MFNNFKDFQNTOR.BNL@groups.bounces.google.com Mon Mar 29 01:59:02 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f141.google.com ([209.85.210.141]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3u2uwSw8JBiMLHBG9DK.DUDQRNMFL9HK.BNLKNIA9MFNNFKDFQNTOR.BNL@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NwAoD-0001Tn-Ec for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:59:02 -0700 Received: by yxe5 with SMTP id 5sf73415yxe.2 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:received:received:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Y8AOgAe2Mv8rtDOH/d/eEMGKW0hvvhcGAXajOelPUrg=; b=0EJ+KYwH6Yqr3tFGpAsuhNJ1kFz4rBZyupo0gIpNQ7I3vRsZZqdPXtUX50SW0f2KjJ pY+ZcKFnTti/pJUNDbMnUVDTr1ajxoDZm/s4rvDSQAbKCQwxWIbD8ebwycuuIsiL3Clj HsO/XyaLr7pLDxkhDhPaxw+034IM1/66bDumE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=zXDsa/vxz7zapM6QAOPb/6UwIAZ+9qY/wAldqiNPQUZ10H9JVgWusyubSgUaQnEPoB ZLq/7Z2LWlMhu73ae2a/OpE1L+zHA2OBFXvjliaMUJmsfcMlovGghMBBPhHds1a6NiKI PxI3lYP0/IBCEBE3ahuDLs8nYp5XlE9HjoWIE= Received: by 10.91.133.13 with SMTP id k13mr344461agn.27.1269853115528; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:35 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.213.2.77 with SMTP id 13ls1234113ebi.0.p; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.58.202 with SMTP id i10mr449395ebh.0.1269853113393; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.58.202 with SMTP id i10mr449394ebh.0.1269853113355; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.25]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 18si212265ewy.4.2010.03.29.01.58.32; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of michael.everson@gmail.com designates 74.125.78.25 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.78.25; Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 4so1169508eyf.41 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.49.200 with SMTP id w8mr181285ebf.80.1269853112115; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.104] (murrisk2.westnet.ie [88.81.100.235]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 13sm2104067ewy.5.2010.03.29.01.58.30 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:58:31 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) Subject: Re: [lojban] la .alis. From: Michael Everson In-Reply-To: <925d17561003280714y30d5eb1fo19b9f97eb6902eaa@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:58:30 +0100 Message-Id: <5BD9338A-1033-49E9-9A75-49046469DE95@gmail.com> References: <2320FCB7-86FE-4E30-9F24-DAD6E40024D7@evertype.com> <925d17561003280714y30d5eb1fo19b9f97eb6902eaa@mail.gmail.com> To: lojban X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078) X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of michael.everson@gmail.com designates 74.125.78.25 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=michael.everson@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: michael.everson@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: X-Thread-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/t/62f96e395a91e500 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/83589a77df44a731 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is an omnibus reply; note who wrote what. On 28 Mar 2010, at 15:14, Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote: > The sentence separator ".i" is visually quite distinct though. It may be = that I'm just too used to Lojban by now, but I find caps at the start of Lo= jban sentences more distracting than helpful. Would you have the ".i" capit= alized, or the first letter of the following word? Well, then you're going to get a very large number of paragraphs or sentenc= es beginning ".i Lu" and I don't really see how that's better than "I lu".= =20 Part of the goal is to use a typography that Carroll would have found famil= iar. It's treating Lojban just like any other Latin-script language, not as= some sort of thing the Binars use to communicate with. (STTNG episode 16 "= 11001001".) To the unfocused eye, Lojban is no different from Basque in its= non-Indo-Europeanism. ;-) > Personally, I like to reserve capital letters for letter names, so "A" in= stead of "abu", "B" instead of "by", and so on, just like "1" can stand for= "pa", "2" for "re" and so on. It would be interesting to see how the Alice= text looks with that convention, given the use of letter names as pronouns= , Well, the letters have names; I would assume that By, Ly, Fy, Sy, Ny would = do as well as Ogham's Beith, Luis, Fearn, Sail, Nion. On 28 Mar 2010, at 21:01, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > No-one's actually going to *stop* you doing as you like with the "la .ali= s." text. Well, xorxes could, but I think he already public-domained it? Aye. > Anyways, we're not going to sue you or anything like that. I doubt that = we'd even get as far as the LLG publically denouncing it (although it's not= outside the realm of possibility if the chosen orthography is particularly= un-Lojbanic). If you ran it through a filter to lowercase everything and strip out the pu= nctuation it would be indistinguishable from the Alice PDF on your site. > My own significant crankiness about the whole idea aside, I appreciate th= at you've come back to the community to discuss it; I wasn't expecting that= after the IRC interaction. Oddly, I did not have such a bad feeling about that interaction. I regret t= hat you did. On 28 Mar 2010, at 22:13, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > A lot of people in the community (myself included obviously) are really, = *really* averse to any changes that are specifically brought in from natura= l languages, *especially* English. Standard Latin-script conventions are not English, though English shares th= em. On 28 Mar 2010, at 22:17, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 04:06:11PM -0400, John Cowan wrote: >>=20 >> Dude. You never heard of "All publicity is good publicity"?=20 >=20 > More relevantly to the matter at hand, see my previous post; I really rea= lly don't want to have to deal with a crop of newbies using some slaughtere= d Latin orthography because they have a book to point at so they can tell m= e I'm wrong and it's OK. Non-standard orthography or not, I expect that the Victorian typographic co= nventions will be careful and well-thought out. Not "slaughtered" or carele= ss. But I am at pains to point out that it looks like the discussion of thi= s sort of thing goes back at least 18 years.=20 >> I don't see you decrying "la .alis." because of the xorxes-anity of the = text. >=20 > Going through it *specifically* for that purpose has been on my to-do lis= t since it was published. The main reason I haven't done it yet is that th= e BPFK needs to finish before I will even *know* what in xorban and what is= n't. I ask again: is this a show-stopper? Is the language in this book Not Ready= For Publication?=20 On 28 Mar 2010, at 22:24, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 09:05:01PM +0100, Michael Everson wrote: >> I am sure that my foreword would begin "This book does not use standard = Lojban orthography." >=20 > If that was expanded into a paragraph, with an appropriate level of "If y= ou use this sort of orthography, people will yell at you" sort of warning, = the whole thing would bother me slightly less. That would be the first sentence of a paragraph about the orthography and t= ypography, yes. The reader would be warned that such conventions are not at= present the norm amongst users of the language, etc. On 28 Mar 2010, at 23:44, Jonathan Jones wrote: >> Fair enough. Does that mean you wouldn't buy such a book if it were in T= engwar? > =20 > That depends. Is it using Lojban's conventions or the conventions of Engl= ish? If it's using Lojban conventions, yes. If it's using the same "serious= ly non-Lojban-standard typographic conventions" as it would were it using t= he Latin script, then no. Well, Tengwar is caseless so there's no argument. My intention is to use standard Latin-script typographic conventions, and t= hese differ in some particulars from those used standardly by Lojban. > You want to use Gothic letters and what-not, fine. You want to use specia= l fonts, fine. Just don't mess with the standard Lojban typographic convent= ions and we've got no problems. Except that the book is then a whole mess of lower-case letters with no pun= ctuation.=20 > (What do you call a drop-cap that isn't a capital letter?) A drop-cap. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.