Re: [bpfk] Finishing the BPFK sections

[Adam Lopresto <adamlopresto@gmail.com>]

As a page, I think that format is just fine. But wasn't the plan for the new definitions to be used in place of the existing ma'oste? If that's so, then each would need its own definition, even if they're somewhat redundant.

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 2:53 PM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:

What do people think about sections like this one:

http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Anaphoric+Pro-sumti

Should each word get its own box or can it remain as it is?

mi'e la selpa'i

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.