Subject: [lojban] Re: Aesthetics

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 01:56:10 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, And Rosta wrote:

> I have in the past been quite shocked at your use of punctuation, e.g.
> guillemets, because it looks like a violation of audiovisual isomorphism.
> The Lojban philosophy was that all punctuation should be speakable,
> so if we write unspeakable punctuation, we aren't testing that design
> feature properly.

I have grown to dislike the habit of adding redundant punctuation marks
glued to their lojbanic analogues {?xu, to(, lu"}. I have less of a
problem with punctuation marks standing in for certain cmavo, though,
which we should be free to do if we are entitled to use orthographies as
far afield as Tolkein letters, and as long as we maintain a 1:1 mapping.

> My own preference is to omit as much as possible, including all
> fullstops and most apostrophes

Eliding apostrophies is just plain rude. It forces the reader, likely to
already have his hands full, to identify the impossible dipthongs; it
requires an intimacy with Lojban.

-- 
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.