From lojban+bncCJ2w4Zy_AhCz-_jdBBoENrni6A@googlegroups.com Thu Apr 08 13:34:21 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NzyQa-0007LH-Ls for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:34:21 -0700 Received: by pwi3 with SMTP id 3sf802677pwi.16 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:34:10 -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: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 :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=0AvpGy1xi4D2C+koF8d9Oxi6zCQsdsacQVG1+qjpSEM=; b=VZt9KtOcxUoMMGMP9srA1BeGd68SJvdFGz73fDtwY40E8r7T0QD5Zzt26lDuNHtRE7 uwCP0oDz1Oa0pfSUE2bJC7uWqf3jwEwdivbCFHl/HrcKt4QNbboenrjMzCKWxIBaf+5A 0hJDHjbPddpK/ich69h3itPYmrEGxo+bZ04eQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references: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:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=LMpF4irxEkPuN3QeiW9S0TcVz0Mac/xus8l+sEK/1rezbHEayBG9oBv5l+QmycxcEy 0f5L7Es4M4VVR44qKf4Fhxl9PSJCE27U6oVuy28KMeuiPUo5AuYXleX/E29WmuoHjFWa MuvsLp+7rMCy1Lms9J7V/KRv11hDYeMQxvfV8= Received: by 10.142.247.9 with SMTP id u9mr56857wfh.5.1270758835890; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:33:55 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.248.9 with SMTP id v9ls14824wfh.1.p; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:33:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.209.9 with SMTP id h9mr115805wfg.25.1270758833850; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.209.9 with SMTP id h9mr115803wfg.25.1270758833812; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw0-f50.google.com (mail-gw0-f50.google.com [74.125.83.50]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 25si84213pzk.4.2010.04.08.13.33.52; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:33:52 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.50 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.83.50; Received: by mail-gw0-f50.google.com with SMTP id 16so303426gwj.9 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:33:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.5.20 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:33:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Doty Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:33:32 -0700 Received: by 10.101.112.9 with SMTP id p9mr785783anm.22.1270758832230; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:33:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Doing it right? To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.50 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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636ed74a3ca51cc0483bf98b3 --001636ed74a3ca51cc0483bf98b3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I, for one, would love to see a space for the kind of exploration you're proposing--I think it would be of great benefit to be able to toss around ideas, without them being seen as necessarily having anything to do with or requiring a change to Lojban as it currently stands. I'm not a huge fan of the versioning idea, although this might have to do more with me misunderstanding what it means. Humans, unfortunately, can't just download a new set of rules/words/whatever and be up and running (yet!), which I think will end up making the versioning idea kind of weird. I do think it's a good idea as a means to keep track of previous and futur= e changes in this way--I guess I feel like "versioning" implies that there will be an unending stream of updates, which would kind of preclude practicality; maybe that's what I'm responding to. Chris On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 18:40, =E7=99=BD=E6=9D=BE Oren wrote: > 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+Wro= ng) > 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 > capable of expressing desired meanings unambiguously, and without > so much effort that the cost of the effort outweighs the benefit > of the clarity of expression. B. It would be a real benefit for > the world for this language to exist and seriously be usable for > real-world stuff (such as legislative language). C. To create the > language you'd need a team -- too much work for one person, and > the job would need many eyes. D. With the benefit of hindsight, > and learning from the Lojban experience, the best way to achieve > (A) would be to start from scratch. (Lojban grammar is needlessly > complicated, and the design of its grammar and of its morphology > makes it impossible to get it down to an acceptable level of > conciseness.) > li'u > > -- > 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 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. --001636ed74a3ca51cc0483bf98b3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I, for one, would love to see a space for the kind of exploration you'r= e proposing--I think it would be of great benefit to be able to toss around= ideas, without them being seen as necessarily having anything to do with o= r requiring a change to Lojban as it currently stands.

I'm not a huge fan of the versioning idea, although this= might have to do more with me misunderstanding what it means. =C2=A0Humans= , unfortunately, can't just download a new set of rules/words/whatever = and be up and running (yet!), which I think will end up making the versioni= ng idea kind of weird. =C2=A0I do think it's a good idea as a means to = keep track of previous and future changes in this way--I guess I feel like = "versioning" implies that there will be an unending stream of upd= ates, which would kind of preclude practicality; maybe that's what I= 9;m responding to.

Chris

On Wed, Apr 7, = 2010 at 18:40, =E7=99=BD=E6=9D=BE Oren <baisong@gvbchina.org.cn> wrote:<= br>
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 fa= ll 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<= br> 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?p= age=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
=C2=A0capable of expressing desired meanings unambiguously, and without
=C2=A0so much effort that the cost of the effort outweighs the benefit
=C2=A0of the clarity of expression. B. It would be a real benefit for
=C2=A0the world for this language to exist and seriously be usable for
=C2=A0real-world stuff (such as legislative language). C. To create the
=C2=A0language you'd need a team -- too much work for one person, and =C2=A0the job would need many eyes. D. With the benefit of hindsight,
=C2=A0and learning from the Lojban experience, the best way to achieve
=C2=A0(A) would be to start from scratch. (Lojban grammar is needlessly
=C2=A0complicated, and the design of its grammar and of its morphology
=C2=A0makes it impossible to get it down to an acceptable level of
=C2=A0conciseness.)
li'u

--
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@googlegroups.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.
--001636ed74a3ca51cc0483bf98b3--