Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PFBaG-0008Ob-4p; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:27 -0800 Received: by pzk26 with SMTP id 26sf1274446pzk.16 for ; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:18 -0800 (PST) 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:date:from:to:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-disposition; bh=EhVOBNjLni9jJ6ylijhq+ZqMHlgCvQ0NaQcJAEeMtU8=; b=I5VQv5iDt8dmzCoSWpyuyMVPl8zeGfqMXnNeXkZRD/kJRr6b4IiFdW6+wfuDEb89Oi h7jHzHhpCcnl5xNiCi2xGGXjALL3G5TTGo3drl9fogShcdlke6JBkNq7nGPoeIsikFB6 acWSkAccP2X9mJmzzerfy6UxtRVZA5i3sGQg0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-disposition; b=frw8Q2vOwjJAv17+s7DnoztpM9JwqAAwqAY044Q/Q47mf4yCVDJNYlKKlrhXrJuS5M kI/arqae2mZqEuWzIamrcz49h1/fjRll9krG/puMGD95w3x2+q/swdi/FqqI2crULqFB aVXyqVV9xa0S8Y0WyQNzlbck8ndBTXzbGpSrk= Received: by 10.142.250.38 with SMTP id x38mr213089wfh.59.1289160672163; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:12 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.2.41 with SMTP id 41ls7197520wfb.0.p; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.245.3 with SMTP id s3mr222531wfh.30.1289160670376; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.245.3 with SMTP id s3mr222530wfh.30.1289160670352; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id n6si8650788wfl.7.2010.11.07.12.11.10; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:10 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.234; Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PFBa1-0008Ny-Bb for bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:11:09 -0800 Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 12:11:09 -0800 From: Robin Lee Powell To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [bpfk] dag-cll, next steps Message-ID: <20101107201109.GD9301@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com References: <20101105232935.GV9301@digitalkingdom.org> <20101106031404.GX9301@digitalkingdom.org> <20101106033028.GB12188@mercury.ccil.org> <20101106202239.GZ9301@digitalkingdom.org> <20101107022316.GA3435@mercury.ccil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101107022316.GA3435@mercury.ccil.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Original-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Length: 1779 On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 10:23:16PM -0400, John Cowan wrote: > Robin Lee Powell scripsit: > > > And so will all the ones after it, no, since we'll renumber > > them? Or are you seriously suggesting that we *never* update any > > of the examples, that if we delete 5.1.3 we leave 5.1.2 and > > 5.1.4 with the same numbers they had before, even we end up with > > a section with 5.1.2, 5.1.2-2, 5.1.5, and 5.1.8 ? If that's what > > you're suggesting, wouldn't *named* examples be infinitely > > better? > > Quite seriously, That's grotesque. If I saw such a thing in a printed book, I'd send it back and assume from then on that the authors were a bunch of illiterate morons. You understand that we *are* talking about printed book source, yes? > and yes, names would have been better, but in effect the numbers > are names. No, the numbers denote their place *in an ordered sequence*. If you want un-ordered names, we need to make them names, not sequence numbers. And I'm fine with doing that. Ending up with the "I'm a drunken retarded six year old" numerical sequence, not so much. To everybody else: my apologies for the bike-shed painting. :P -Robin -- http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future. Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false" is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.