From 3zMS8SwoJBpkLNHFB5AKBL9F3BE.5HFEHC43G9HH9E79KHNIL.5HF@groups.bounces.google.com Wed Apr 07 10:46:17 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3zMS8SwoJBpkLNHFB5AKBL9F3BE.5HFEHC43G9HH9E79KHNIL.5HF@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NzZKL-0000Z5-IA for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:46:16 -0700 Received: by pwi3 with SMTP id 3sf393110pwi.16 for ; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:46:03 -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:from:date :received:message-id:subject: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=tc/ICCE3Qg4kPplsiENmrNycTNei2oqHjahY1xmYoiY=; b=sGtwH94oGj6bfKIV35bhcMFU+EB9m7klBpksqoncaHv7v0R/LiVrO1Ss9ALDqmtAMj TO/Heruv5FJmmCAF8MrC+TfBo5sYik0AB/0nVcICTFGuF4GqdrEGqFxJr0cRhEmZvqE6 8xeiVEyvMEdqlYcRBpfx1LTFyK+1PS0wnmmhg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject :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=ktGdYfM2d00pqJaeXyDUCoV4YoNXBRJk1sMUpEFRBDQLPHmlXARzFNcbJBsa2g6lFd hqxGYtZucMXbzMzs5FBFBs6xlHsWyinf+DP/FG4klnDdqn9AIZMQw3du2zp/fd2oM5Tx 9ce3fIMDrbpduRP6Lmh4gHkKGNfDCUtpgIBsA= Received: by 10.115.101.12 with SMTP id d12mr623795wam.1.1270662348872; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:45:48 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.114.18.37 with SMTP id 37ls1809767war.2.p; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:45:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.29.14 with SMTP id g14mr1423942waj.12.1270662346171; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.29.14 with SMTP id g14mr1423941waj.12.1270662346143; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw0-f51.google.com (mail-gw0-f51.google.com [74.125.83.51]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 25si3076338pzk.0.2010.04.07.10.45.44; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:45:45 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.83.51; Received: by gwb20 with SMTP id 20so648569gwb.10 for ; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:45:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.5.20 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 10:45:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Doty Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 10:45:22 -0700 Received: by 10.101.135.2 with SMTP id m2mr8933794ann.95.1270662344367; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Tangent the second: ASCII To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=suomichris@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: suomichris@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/d319d5cadc183c24 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/e1adb99e53042f9f Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5c043aa5f9c0483a921f1 --001636c5c043aa5f9c0483a921f1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I'm wondering how closely tied people are to the idea that, if a hypothetical thing happened where Lojban got, say, tone, it should stick with ASCII-only characters? I realize there was a good reason for this in the past, but I have trouble seeing a reasoning for it now. Just wondering how people feel about that now that Unicode has become the standard? ASCII is synonymous with "old-fashioned computing" to me, so just curious. (I think there are advantages both staying with ASCII or going by Unicode, and am not advocating for a change or anything; just curious what people think.) Chris -- 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. --001636c5c043aa5f9c0483a921f1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm wondering how closely tied people are to the idea that, if a hypoth= etical thing happened where Lojban got, say, tone, it should stick with ASC= II-only characters? =A0I realize there was a good reason for this in the pa= st, but I have trouble seeing a reasoning for it now. =A0Just wondering how= people feel about that now that Unicode has become the standard? =A0ASCII = is synonymous with "old-fashioned computing" to me, so just curio= us.

(I think there are advantages both staying with ASCII or goi= ng by Unicode, and am not advocating for a change or anything; just curious= what people think.)

Chris

--
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.
--001636c5c043aa5f9c0483a921f1--