From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Dec 10 15:56:30 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 10 Dec 2002 23:56:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 30828 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 23:56:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Dec 2002 23:56:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lmsmtp02.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.112) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 23:56:30 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-2.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.2]) by lmsmtp02.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD12D5B695 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:56:28 +0100 (MET) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] brochure: aesthetics Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:56:28 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Nick: > The use of what looks to me like Optima in the 3rd edition of Loglan 1 > (1975) might mean Optima in my booklets will hearten some as an > instance of Loglan continuity. I'd think that a reason against using it > myself :-) , but Optima *is* way classy It is way classy in the capitals, but sadly that is of no benefit to Lojban, since Lojban eschews capitals and the millennia of exquisite refinement that go with them.... I don't mean to start a flamewar, but I find it a little unhappy that our publications elect to set Lojban text in typefaces chosen to be as ugly as possible without being rejected outright. Choosing, say, a garamond might go a long way to counteracting the ugliness that many hate or delight to discern in Lojban on the page, and at the least it would provide a strikingly contrapuntal effect... This is absolutely not a request or suggestion for the font to change in the book! You have done more than enough work on it & it is time you were shot of it & able to devote yourself to more substantive matters like the arcana of the semantics of never-used cmavo... --And.