Re: [lojban] la .alis.

["A. PIEKARSKI" <totus@rogers.com>]

> 
> In the joy of contributing further to the going-on-60 year history of LoCCan 
> typography, y'all seem to have missed the basic point:  someone is offering 
> to publish a work in Lojban on a real press for a real public, something that 
> comes to very few conlangs.  Jump at the opportunity, for goodness 
> sakes!

As for the "changes" he is making in "Lojban typography", they 
> fall well within the range of past approaches and have the rather clear 
> advantage of making texts more easily readable (although ease has never been a 
> long LoCCan suit).  If newbies end up using them, then rejoice in the 
> newbies and lead them by local example back to the true shining path (or, 
> possibly change to that way of doing tjings yourself).  Don't jump all over 
> them for total trivia and watch them fade away.

As a recent (maybe current) newbie, (perhaps you've forgotten what being 
one was like), I would say that the last thing I need is the confusion that would result 
from having the only truly published work in Lojban printed in a modified or 
alternative orthography.

mu'o mi'e .totus.

-- 
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=en.