From 3oPmxSwsJBpcCLB5125I75E7D19C.3FDCFA21E7FF7C57IFLGJ.3FD@groups.bounces.google.com Tue Mar 30 06:16:43 2010 Received: from mail-pz0-f144.google.com ([209.85.222.144]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3oPmxSwsJBpcCLB5125I75E7D19C.3FDCFA21E7FF7C57IFLGJ.3FD@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NwbJ7-00035l-Ck for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:43 -0700 Received: by pzk8 with SMTP id 8sf168142pzk.26 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:31 -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:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:date:received:message-id:subject:from:to :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; bh=GBJiXFYszzcVB9s9ZvUubHM+w88laeK6bc7ZhQklBuw=; b=mPqwYJbzI9qW3U8HbrQq5PL/BWlEY9DAmbuEIKAbVrqrO4uNArCrrVfOUgzQ23dJOB PlTzLqte84RKC/8NCG3FmEqKdaezQ9HG5P07Nw/nLZCXS4SdEYfiRJ/uaJrs17TKVOes ydtmVy1Vc56OqxGstqIIe02TEeDi3pug8x5cQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to: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; b=KrEy8kTmmNaAHe0+mpfZ0ev/xh25l8NmPMJaG+/sLjIYgI7QHe1sMNxFBvmBeoOhYJ IgI3n6q2q75LHU2Y11Y/kdJjMo5ugUAS/ippSdPdpQu10yIneXAeJaAVDa/tqq+xoqf0 Gp36dv8p6d0662XOx12lR+VTBuchhajVNprEo= Received: by 10.115.27.16 with SMTP id e16mr25697waj.20.1269954976109; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:16 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.115.117.28 with SMTP id u28ls3131171wam.1.p; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.187.24 with SMTP id k24mr1169355waf.13.1269954973909; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.187.24 with SMTP id k24mr1169354waf.13.1269954973870; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 25si1177768pzk.12.2010.03.30.06.16.12; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.53; Received: by mail-vw0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 10so1863117vws.26 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.97.206 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <23298cb41003292314q6a4c6029u90c80f5dda2a2836@mail.gmail.com> References: <2320FCB7-86FE-4E30-9F24-DAD6E40024D7@evertype.com> <702226df1003290731i3cbaeb3fs9db2d49a667273b1@mail.gmail.com> <44AE9DF1-8DD8-4134-895C-054AA27AE1EC@gmail.com> <702226df1003290810r9685560v7ef251bdfb421911@mail.gmail.com> <4BB0D4DF.2070501@gmail.com> <702226df1003291006o242c37a8q6bc5ea53b6e6377d@mail.gmail.com> <23298cb41003291406x5dc8a4faub2d8d21693f9c5fc@mail.gmail.com> <414121.54710.qm@web88007.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <23298cb41003292314q6a4c6029u90c80f5dda2a2836@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:16:10 -0400 Received: by 10.220.123.132 with SMTP id p4mr3967941vcr.59.1269954971203; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5715b9301003300616k10fa7fdem167a71679b2de29e@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] la .alis. From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@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/4a2c456fa7c6a08e Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e68ee000f077fe0483046efd --0016e68ee000f077fe0483046efd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > It's really ironic that Lojban born because Loglan was proprietary and not open to contribution. > It seems to me that we are now in the same situation with the difference that it's not even clear > who is holding things back. From what I understand, the reason was more that JCB kept changing the language and people wanted a stable language that they could actually learn and start using before it had been changed again. That's why the hard-line on changing the gismu definitions. On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Remo Dentato wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:51 AM, A. PIEKARSKI wrote: > >> >> remod, are you seriously suggesting that a competing orthography is the >> answer to BPFK stagnation? >> > > What I'm suggesting is that either the BPFK takes some decision in moving > forward or stop bashing any attempts to try something different. The topic > of "writing lojban" is just one of the many. > > About typography/ortography/alphabet and the like it is out of question > that plain lojban text is "ugly" at the first view and difficult to the eye > as there is no clear delimiter for the parts of the sentences. When I > printed "lo nu binxo" ( > http://picasaweb.google.it/rdentato/LoNuBinxo#5395156010337642754) for > myself I tried to make the dots before "i" a little bit larger to have some > more immediate visual hook it was surely not an elegant solution, I wish > there was some better solution. > > We have centuries and centuries of work on making texts more readable and > appealing, I can't really understand the argument that adding capital > letters, accents comma would be "non-lojbanic". It seems an attempt to close > the debate. Especially if (as it seems) the proposal is to have something > optional. > > I don't see the problem with "la .Alis." being the same thing as "la > .alis." and I never liked the use of capital letters instead of accents. > > It's really ironic that Lojban born because Loglan was proprietary and not > open to contribution. It seems to me that we are now in the same situation > with the difference that it's not even clear who is holding things back. > > Personally, that is what make my interest for lojban decrease at an > exponential rate. I'll might come back to it one day but I become a little > tired of seeing that those that are in charge of the language seem not > really interested in making it evolve. To me, Lojban is very interesting > but would still require work to appeal more people on the other hand it > seems that BPFK and LLG (it's really difficult to understand who is who and > who does what) are only interested in preserve it in its current form. > Lojban needs more speakers/writers, because a language is measured by the > number of people can use it, otherwise is just a nice academic exercise. > > > BTW, I'm still waiting for an answer on wheter I could put the PDF of the > revised copy of CLL on the wiki. It has been months now and I don't even > know if the they met and deliberated on the matter. > > > > -- > 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@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --0016e68ee000f077fe0483046efd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >=A0It's really i= ronic that Lojban born because Loglan was proprietary and not open to contr= ibution.=A0
&= gt; It seems to me that we are now in the same situation with the differenc= e that it's not even clear=A0
> who is holding= things back.

From what I understand, the reason w= as more that JCB kept changing the language and people wanted a stable lang= uage that they could actually learn and start using before it had been chan= ged again. =A0That's why the hard-line on changing the gismu definition= s.

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Remo D= entato <rdentato= @gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:51 A= M, A. PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com> wrote:
<= div>

remod, are you seriously suggesting that=20 a=A0competing orthography is the answer to BPFK stagnation?=A0
=
=A0
What I'm= suggesting is that either the BPFK takes some decision in moving forward o= r stop bashing any attempts to try something different.=A0 The topic of &qu= ot;writing lojban" is just one of the many.

About typography/ortography/alphabet and the like it is out of qu= estion that plain lojban text is "ugly" at the first view and dif= ficult to the eye as there is no clear delimiter for the parts of the sente= nces.=A0 When I printed "lo nu binxo" (http:= //picasaweb.google.it/rdentato/LoNuBinxo#5395156010337642754)=A0 for my= self=A0 I tried to make the dots before "i" a little bit larger t= o have some more immediate visual hook it was surely not an elegant solutio= n, I wish there was some better solution.

We have centuries and centuries of work on making texts more readable a= nd appealing, I can't really understand the argument that adding capita= l letters, accents comma would be "non-lojbanic". It seems an att= empt to close the debate.=A0 Especially if (as it seems) the proposal is to= have something optional.

I don't see the problem with "la .Alis." being the same t= hing as "la .alis." and I never liked the use of capital letters = instead of accents.

It's really ironic that Lojban born because = Loglan was proprietary and not open to contribution. It seems to me that we= are now in the same situation with the difference that it's not even c= lear who is holding things back.

Personally, that is what make my interest for lojban decrease at an exp= onential rate. I'll might come back to it one day but I become a little= tired of seeing that those that are in charge of the language seem not rea= lly interested in making it evolve.=A0 To me, Lojban is very interesting bu= t would still require work to appeal more people on the other hand it seems= that BPFK and LLG (it's really difficult to understand who is who and = who does what) are only interested in preserve it in its current form.=A0 L= ojban needs more speakers/writers, because a language is measured by the nu= mber of people can use it, otherwise is just a nice academic exercise.


BTW, I'm still waiting for an answer on wheter I could put the PDF = of the revised copy of CLL on the wiki. It has been months now and I don= 9;t even know if the they met and deliberated on the matter.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
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.
--0016e68ee000f077fe0483046efd--