I think having goals is important. The references in the baseline statement support this opinion.
If we wanted to specify goals for Lojban now, and preserve the existing language, they would have to apply retrospectively. We would need to choose goals such that the work done during Lojban's development is consistent with them.
For example, if we chose the goal "to be syntacticaly unambiguous" (or "to be monoparsing", if you prefer that term) the existing development would certainly be consistent with this example goal.
(Side note; I would probably consider the goal in this example to be an instrumental goal, and I would wonder if there is a terminal goal behind it).
So to determine (reverse engineer) retroactive goals which are consistent, the question then becomes:
What were the unofficial principles/reasons/explanations/justifications for each of Lojban's design/implementation decisions during Lojban's development?
This question can best be answered by those who made the design decisions during Lojban's development, but some (partial) answers may be able to be inferred or extracted from explanations in the CLL.
An answer to this question covering many design/implementation decisions would be much larger and more detailed than the answer to the question of goals. For those who made the design decisions during Lojban's development, it is probably more reasonable to ask a question with a more general answer:
What were the unofficial principles applied to make design/implementation decisions during Lojban's development?
Andrew / DerSaidin
On Sunday, September 7, 2014 2:13:22 PM UTC+10, Andrew Browne wrote:
This best answers my original question - we currently don't have official goals for the language.
Andrew / DerSaidin
On Monday, June 9, 2014 11:54:43 PM UTC+10, Andrew Browne wrote:
What are the official goals of lojban?
So out of all this, what are officially the goals of lojban?
Thanks