Re: [lojban] la .alis.

[Remo Dentato <rdentato@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:51 AM, A. PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com> wrote:

remod, are you seriously suggesting that a competing orthography is the answer to BPFK stagnation? 

 

What I'm suggesting is that either the BPFK takes some decision in moving forward or stop bashing any attempts to try something different.  The topic of "writing lojban" is just one of the many.

About typography/ortography/alphabet and the like it is out of question that plain lojban text is "ugly" at the first view and difficult to the eye as there is no clear delimiter for the parts of the sentences.  When I printed "lo nu binxo" (http://picasaweb.google.it/rdentato/LoNuBinxo#5395156010337642754)  for myself  I tried to make the dots before "i" a little bit larger to have some more immediate visual hook it was surely not an elegant solution, I wish there was some better solution.

We have centuries and centuries of work on making texts more readable and appealing, I can't really understand the argument that adding capital letters, accents comma would be "non-lojbanic". It seems an attempt to close the debate.  Especially if (as it seems) the proposal is to have something optional.

I don't see the problem with "la .Alis." being the same thing as "la .alis." and I never liked the use of capital letters instead of accents.

It's really ironic that Lojban born because Loglan was proprietary and not open to contribution. It seems to me that we are now in the same situation with the difference that it's not even clear who is holding things back.

Personally, that is what make my interest for lojban decrease at an exponential rate. I'll might come back to it one day but I become a little tired of seeing that those that are in charge of the language seem not really interested in making it evolve.  To me, Lojban is very interesting but would still require work to appeal more people on the other hand it seems that BPFK and LLG (it's really difficult to understand who is who and who does what) are only interested in preserve it in its current form.  Lojban needs more speakers/writers, because a language is measured by the number of people can use it, otherwise is just a nice academic exercise.

BTW, I'm still waiting for an answer on wheter I could put the PDF of the revised copy of CLL on the wiki. It has been months now and I don't even know if the they met and deliberated on the matter.

-- 
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.