From 3NzOySwcJBmgKeKUTaYMSGOR.IUSRUPHGTMUUMRKMXUaVY.IUS@groups.bounces.google.com Tue Mar 30 10:22:27 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f141.google.com ([209.85.210.141]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3NzOySwcJBmgKeKUTaYMSGOR.IUSRUPHGTMUUMRKMXUaVY.IUS@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1Nwf8v-0008Um-TU for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:22:27 -0700 Received: by yxe5 with SMTP id 5sf1846903yxe.2 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:22:15 -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=JIuPZh+O9oYZIXNRSPGHx/skHZyytQo/F0q2+YYemdY=; b=3L48KQdV18biop14TmghEy7a9MGPiJuBcQhJJ7IXtLqF5KefFgTKkFEPf+X1w3bKDL hE+XsFArdmH/mew07IyO45VXJw1ZzmXPxZREVg3QGcsfhvdpc57XNVsFiygaqM+6YE2r rP31vbSplShOVrPqA8br1cBHhXmbtSAoQhqwA= 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=W9Q0iXR3sOMMO/6Cw4wJNLEpsu+swyH57aeBMvCm/gUAXbghtteOrkPXAvW2Igcszv W1CcrthzmQu7fjXajqWMVj+kd8xZeif92v5yydynWLw/V6HqxCjWZ6ZJqErBgqnSwaZ6 o65wwWIFECnhsyH9RMG0j2KL5cJwFMhVQbo5g= Received: by 10.91.90.12 with SMTP id s12mr24837agl.37.1269969720128; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:22:00 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.213.41.209 with SMTP id p17ls1309615ebe.1.p; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:21:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.90.203 with SMTP id j11mr38058ebm.4.1269969718792; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.90.203 with SMTP id j11mr38057ebm.4.1269969718725; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ew0-f210.google.com (mail-ew0-f210.google.com [209.85.219.210]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 11si324765ewy.5.2010.03.30.10.21.57; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.210 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.210; Received: by mail-ew0-f210.google.com with SMTP id 2so833081ewy.16 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:21:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.2.209 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:21:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4BB0D4DF.2070501@gmail.com> <8EE07369-765A-49AB-AEC4-1DEC1A904C37@gmail.com> <20100330090253.GG3000@nvg.org> <59C6A282-0F28-4016-98C7-907FBD3C4379@gmail.com> <23298cb41003300332u6bde63fdk9f8b819fff7bf2ce@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:21:57 -0600 Received: by 10.216.87.13 with SMTP id x13mr358936wee.12.1269969717268; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <702226df1003301021t1ad12953qd63933de614f7965@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] My opinion on Lojban typography variants, and the la .alis. sample page From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.210 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@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/28b30555982830cf Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d99f29df92ed048307ddbb --0016e6d99f29df92ed048307ddbb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Kevin Reid wrote: > On Mar 30, 2010, at 9:35, Michael Everson wrote: > > On 30 Mar 2010, at 11:32, Remo Dentato wrote: >> >> I think that an example of a page with lojban text composed according yo= ur >>> proposal would be very beneficial for the discussion. >>> >> >> OK. I mocked this up quite quickly. First, look again at the Yiddish >> example: >> >> http://www.evertype.com/books/alice-yi-p.1.png >> >> Then, have a look at the Lojban: >> >> http://www.evertype.com/books/alice-jbo-p.1.png >> > > Before anything else, I would like to say that I admire your patience and > your goal to balance typographical aesthetics and the wishes of the Lojba= n > community. > > > Suggestions: > > I notice that your =93normal=94 (left side) Lojban text lacks any =93.=94 > whatsoever. One of your objections seems to be the absence of > non-letter-based cues to beginnings and ends of sentences; how about > inserting the =93.=94 before =93i=94? > > One could debate whether doing just this is worse than fully-dotted or > fully-undotted Lojban text, and whether it would mislead beginners into > thinking that =93.=94 has something to do with sentence separation, but i= t at > least has the advantage of being =93not wrong=94 and increasing the visib= ility > of sentence separators. I, for one, am used to reading =93.i=94 as being = the > sentence separator. In fact, considering that a real speaker will pause > between sentences, arguably even =93... cu tcidu. i ku'i cy ...=94 is not= wrong > as a representation. > > I think it should be at least tried to have the Lojban text fully dotted > (=93.i=94, =93cy.=94, =93.alis.=94, etc.); even if they do not fall on se= ntence > separations, they add visual structure and might reduce the =93wall of te= xt=94 > appearance of your left-side page. > > I note that you have placed capitalization-and-period for each plain =93i= =94, > and the =93i ku'i=94, but not the logically-connected =93i ca bo=94 (line= 4 of > paragraph 2) or =93i je nai ji'a=94 (line 1 of paragraph 3). I find this = to be > inconsistent; if you're going to be strict about Latin conventions betwee= n > unconnected sentences, you should use semicolons between these connected > sentences. > > > My opinion on the matter in general: > > I see three major categories of possible differences: > > 1. Those which represent Lojban structure differently. For example, > writing =E1=E9=ED=F3=FA instead of AEIOU for syllable stress. > I have no problem with this. > > 2. Those which add redundant cues to the existing sentence structure. > For example, adding quotation marks and question marks, or > italicizing {ba'e}-marked words. > As long as they are used appropriately (i.e., as proscribed in the CLL), I am uneasy but forgiving about this. > > 3. Those which add information. For example, capitalizing some > sumti-selbri but not others, such as you have done with =93lo Blabi > Ractu=94 vs. =93le glare djedi=94, or adding italics where there were= no > emphasis markers in the text, such as in =93le Ractu ca'a lebna lo > junla le kosta daski=94. > I am deeply, deeply, deeply against this. (Adding this one in myself:) 4. The inclusion of {denpa bu} where it is currently left out. I am very much for this. In fact, I am as much for this as I am against (3.). > > I do not mind the first (especially when they have aesthetic value such a= s, > in my opinion, the use of accents instead of uppercase), am ambivalent ab= out > the second (especially as they are somewhat analogous to a speaker's use = of > tone), and object to the third (because I feel it will confuse the reader= as > to the actual structure and significant aspects of Lojban text). > > -- > Kevin Reid > > > > > -- > 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=3Den. > > --=20 mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu --=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. --0016e6d99f29df92ed048307ddbb Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Kevin Reid <kpreid@mac.com><= /span> wrote:
On Mar 30, 2010, at 9:35, Michae= l Everson wrote:

On 30 Mar 2010, at 11:32, Remo D= entato wrote:

I think that an example of a pag= e with lojban text composed according your proposal would be very beneficia= l for the discussion.

OK. I mocked this up quite quickly. First, look again at t= he Yiddish example:

http://www.evertype.com/books/alice-yi-p.1.png=

Then, have a look at the Lojban:

http://www.evertype.com/book= s/alice-jbo-p.1.png

Before anything else, I would l= ike to say that I admire your patience and your goal to balance typographic= al aesthetics and the wishes of the Lojban community.


Suggestions:

I notice that your =93normal=94 (left side) Loj= ban text lacks any =93.=94 whatsoever. One of your objections seems to be t= he absence of non-letter-based cues to beginnings and ends of sentences; ho= w about inserting the =93.=94 before =93i=94?

One could debate whether doing just this is worse than fully-dotted or = fully-undotted Lojban text, and whether it would mislead beginners into thi= nking that =93.=94 has something to do with sentence separation, but it at = least has the advantage of being =93not wrong=94 and increasing the visibil= ity of sentence separators. I, for one, am used to reading =93.i=94 as bein= g the sentence separator. In fact, considering that a real speaker will pau= se between sentences, arguably even =93... cu tcidu. i ku'i cy ...=94 i= s not wrong as a representation.

I think it should be at least tried to have the Lojban text fully dotte= d (=93.i=94, =93cy.=94, =93.alis.=94, etc.); even if they do not fall on se= ntence separations, they add visual structure and might reduce the =93wall = of text=94 appearance of your left-side page.

I note that you have placed capitalization-and-period for each plain = =93i=94, and the =93i ku'i=94, but not the logically-connected =93i ca = bo=94 (line 4 of paragraph 2) or =93i je nai ji'a=94 (line 1 of paragra= ph 3). I find this to be inconsistent; if you're going to be strict abo= ut Latin conventions between unconnected sentences, you should use semicolo= ns between these connected sentences.


My opinion on the matter in general:

I see three major categ= ories of possible differences:

=A01. Those which represent Lojban st= ructure differently. For example,
=A0 =A0 writing =E1=E9=ED=F3=FA instea= d of AEIOU for syllable stress.
=A0
I have no problem with this.

=A02. Those which add redund= ant cues to the existing sentence structure.
=A0 =A0 For example, adding= quotation marks and question marks, or
=A0 =A0 italicizing {ba'e}-marked words.
=A0
As long as they are used appropriately (i.e., as proscribed in the CLL= ), I am uneasy but forgiving about this.

=A03. Those which add inform= ation. For example, capitalizing some
=A0 =A0 sumti-selbri but not other= s, such as you have done with =93lo Blabi
=A0 =A0 Ractu=94 vs. =93le glare djedi=94, or adding italics where there we= re no
=A0 =A0 emphasis markers in the text, such as in =93le Ractu ca= 9;a lebna lo
=A0 =A0 junla le kosta daski=94.
=A0
I am deeply, deeply, deeply against this.
=A0
(Adding this one in myself:)
4. The inclusion of {denpa bu} where it is currently left out.
=A0
I am very much for this. In fact, I am as much for this as I am agains= t (3.).

I do not mind the first (esp= ecially when they have aesthetic value such as, in my opinion, the use of a= ccents instead of uppercase), am ambivalent about the second (especially as= they are somewhat analogous to a speaker's use of tone), and object to= the third (because I feel it will confuse the reader as to the actual stru= cture and significant aspects of Lojban text).

--
Kevin Reid =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0<http://switchb.org/kpreid/>



=
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog= le 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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.




-= -
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe d= enpa bu

--
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.
--0016e6d99f29df92ed048307ddbb--