Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20040706182359.00abcb60@pop.east.cox.net>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 18:28:55 -0400
To: bpfk-announce@lojban.org
From: Nora LeChevalier <noras@cox.net>
Subject: [bpfk-announce] Re: gadri Update; Please Respond!  Pretty
  please.
In-Reply-To: <20040703230727.GA32105@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: bpfk-announce-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: bpfk-announce-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: bpfk-announce@lojban.org
Content-Length: 1295

At 04:07 PM 7/3/04 -0700, you wrote:
>For those of you not following the entirety of the gadri discussion,
>things got hectic again and now seem to have settled down somewhat.
>
>Jordan appeared briefly, and then dropped out due to lack of time.
>Pierre and Nora are still against.
>
>Jordan's involvement resulted in the creation of Lojban-based formal
>definitions for the gadri, but there is some concern that we don't know
>what these mean, pricipally because we haven't definied zo'e and noi.
>
>I propose that we add the following two sections to the gadri
>checkpoint:
>
>     * Grammatical Pro-sumti KOhA7 KOhA8
>     * Subordinators NOI GEhU KUhO VUhO GOI ZIhE
>
>I'm willing to shepherd one or both, but I would of course love it if
>someone else wants to do it.  In particular, I'm not entirely certain of
>the sufficiency of my understanding of ce'u.
>
>Having added these in, I further propose that we give it another month,
>and if we haven't acheived something that looks like consensus, we move
>on to something else.
>
>Please tell me what you think of this plan, because I could really use
>some feedback right now.
>
>Thanks.
>
>-Robin, beleaguered BPFK jatna.

Sounds good to me.


-- 
mi'e noras                                             noras@cox.net
Nora LeChevalier