Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: html tag ethics

From: Robert LeChevalier <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:07:24 -0500

At 08:40 AM 12/10/02 -0600, Steven Belknap wrote:
>On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 05:15 AM, Robert LeChevalier wrote:
>>> Even you refer to "Loglan", meaning TLI's implementation of JCB's idea,
>>
>>We officially use "TLI Loglan" to refer to JCB's language. If we were to
>>only use "Loglan" to refer to JCB's language, and only use "Lojban" for
>>ours, we could undo the court-ruling that "Loglan" is generic.
>
>I would prefer to use TLI Loglan to refer to the ancestor language and 
>Loglan to refer to the currently active language.

You might prefer it, but the community has chosen to use Lojban. I 
occasionally use the full name "Lojban - A Realization of Loglan" when 
being formal, but informally no one is likely to use that 
phrase. Meanwhile, in the context of your 500, TLI Loglan is not even a 
single language, but a family of languages, ranging from the one in the 
1960 Sci Am article to the 3rd edition language of 1974-5 to the 4th 
edition language of 1989, to the current TLI language. But all of them 
call their language "Loglan", and our language "Lojban".

> In the interests of clarity for those who lack a full appreciation for 
> the history of the language, I have agreed to use LLG Loglan for the 
> active language for a brief time. I will now only use lojban when writing 
> in LLG Loglan. Which reminds me that all this political nonsense is 
> interfering with my actual learning of LLG Loglan.

Yes it is. And everyone else's, which is why they are showing 
hostility. They don't care!

lojbab

-- 
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org