From phma@oltronics.net Sat Sep 02 05:22:35 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6317 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2000 12:22:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Sep 2000 12:22:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (207.15.133.28) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Sep 2000 12:22:31 -0000 Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500) id 810C13C565; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 08:21:05 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] samselpla vs. samjva Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 08:20:02 -0400 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.29.2] Content-Type: text/plain References: <20000902075930.40A7126333@mail.taral.net> In-Reply-To: <20000902075930.40A7126333@mail.taral.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <00090208210400.00887@neofelis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com From: Pierre Abbat On Sat, 02 Sep 2000, Taral wrote: > >Since lujvo aren't standardized, I'd like to suggest a change from >"samselpla" to "samjva". I tend to view "samselpla" (computer type-of >plan) as "computer architecture", whereas "samjva" (computer type-of >rule(s)) really echoes my idea of what a "computer program" is. How about "seltibyste" (list of commands)? phma