From 3NzS9SwgJBnQYWl.gjWfYeSad.UgedgbTSfYggYdWYjgmhk.Uge@groups.bounces.google.com Wed Apr 07 18:41:38 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3NzS9SwgJBnQYWl.gjWfYeSad.UgedgbTSfYggYdWYjgmhk.Uge@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NzgkO-0000MF-Cz for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:37 -0700 Received: by pwi3 with SMTP id 3sf505439pwi.16 for ; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:26 -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:sender: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:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ifBps47tZLVpr4IT1ccjK4uV8zKBL/ScyS4MJ1vpN+Q=; b=mecrS302ryXoYBWW1n8mPD/AJ5f9XcQyfHkf4cIVvCX0rSWVOTHfHdMk1HXMvUl0bm 00iMYutMv4cetBcG1JlhyTHL2ayILXuFDhUM/p8j8quKTOv7WrS22IIGgC7J8KIfngdt zuD7iR6pLl5GpY22OJAYs/iIzfMamoui/vsfQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender: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:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=fn1Uk7N23GvHwygrO7KEEs9HLr+KQDq0aFg5GtPTj26mPhb3F7T8atuN5W9GpHOGfg RzdRpyo3KHrcgPiIdr3yAQibefXnYaHxIvKEASP7zjGAZdmjDwH/tBHMwpWQj6sr6U4S bEhXP5U1lnp5jc/eAf0AfxLfUX1ewXtaNa6+M= Received: by 10.141.4.8 with SMTP id g8mr656377rvi.22.1270690871802; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:11 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.141.187.12 with SMTP id o12ls2824941rvp.0.p; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.124.7 with SMTP id b7mr1504960rvn.7.1270690869428; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.124.7 with SMTP id b7mr1504959rvn.7.1270690869260; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pw0-f49.google.com (mail-pw0-f49.google.com [209.85.160.49]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 19si946678pzk.3.2010.04.07.18.41.08; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of get.oren@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.49 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.49; Received: by mail-pw0-f49.google.com with SMTP id 3so1628165pwj.22 for ; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.109.10 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 18:40:48 -0700 (PDT) From: =?UTF-8?B?55m95p2+IE9yZW4=?= Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 09:40:48 +0800 Received: by 10.142.5.25 with SMTP id 25mr4014959wfe.78.1270690868151; Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Doing it right? To: lojban X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of get.oren@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.49 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=get.oren@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: get.oren@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/edefd2437b3b8474 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/7ccc91cb7e36bdfe List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I like the idea of versioning[1]. And I like the idea of the BPFK being like the WC3, providing authoritative standards. However, I don't think it's in our best interest to distance the layman reformer or the linguistic idealist. I think it's a shame to hear that some people interested in contributing to Lojban, even 'oldbies,' haven't been active in the community because they fall into one of these groups. I think an executive power granted to the BPFK solves the dilemma of the layman reformer-- if the suggestion passes the four-part-tie-breaker, it becomes an official recommendation. But for the idealists, what if in addition to versioned Lojban, we had an LLG-sanctioned space for discussion of significantly-revisionist[2] schemes? That is: "The Logical Language Group oversees the development, standardization and usage of logical languages. Currently, Lojban V4 is a standardized, robust realization of a logical language, with an active community of learners and users, and an ever-growing body of literature. The BPFK group maintains standards, with new suggestions and experiments occasionally becoming official recommendations. Those interested in learning to speak (and maybe think!) as clearly as humanly possible, ko tadni! Additionally, LoCCan is a space for unregulated development of a logical language with similar goals, but without adherence to Lojban V4 grammar or vocabulary. Those interested in exploring alternative logical language possibilities, come here!" ...pei co'o mi'e korbi [1] (From the essay, http://teddyb.org/robin/tiki-index.php?page=3DLojban:+You're+Doing+It+Wrong= ) lu I propose a cmavo for language version, that takes a single number for the version; just a simple incrementing whole number. I suggest 1 for Loglan, 2 for pre-rafsi reallocation Lojban, 3 for pre-xorlo Lojban, 4 for current Lojban. li'u [2] (from an earlier post, And Rosta) lu A. Your #1 and #2 goals were paramount: the language should be =A0capable of expressing desired meanings unambiguously, and without =A0so much effort that the cost of the effort outweighs the benefit =A0of the clarity of expression. B. It would be a real benefit for =A0the world for this language to exist and seriously be usable for =A0real-world stuff (such as legislative language). C. To create the =A0language you'd need a team -- too much work for one person, and =A0the job would need many eyes. D. With the benefit of hindsight, =A0and learning from the Lojban experience, the best way to achieve =A0(A) would be to start from scratch. (Lojban grammar is needlessly =A0complicated, and the design of its grammar and of its morphology =A0makes it impossible to get it down to an acceptable level of =A0conciseness.) li'u --=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.