Talk:BPFK To-Do

From Lojban
Revision as of 09:39, 27 January 2015 by Gleki (talk | contribs) (Created page with "<div><div><div><div><div>Posted by [http://www.lojban.org/tiki/user9 arj] on Tue 06 of Jan., 2004 21:55 GMT posts: 953</div><div>rlpowell: do you mean that John Cowan does not...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Posted by arj on Tue 06 of Jan., 2004 21:55 GMT posts: 953
rlpowell: do you mean that John Cowan does not have the authority to approve the correction of mere spelling errors in the CLL?
Score: 0.00 Vote:
1 2 3 4 5
top of page

rlpowellPosted by rlpowell on Tue 06 of Jan., 2004 22:33 GMT posts: 14214

> arj: > rlpowell: do you mean that John Cowan does not have the authority to approve the correction of mere spelling errors in the CLL?

Given the copyright, pretty much anyone has the authority to do whatever they want. But an official LLG update to the CLL is the whole LLG's responsibility, not just John's, and this sort of thing very clearly falls under the mandate of the BPFK.

Having said that, I as BPFK jatna will happily accept as a non-issue anything that John agrees was clearly a simple mistake.

-Robin

Score: 0.00 Vote:
1 2 3 4 5
top of page

Posted by pycyn on Tue 13 of Jan., 2004 01:37 GMT posts: 2388

The definition for {xagri} is not half as weird as that for the other two classes of wind instruments, which lack reeds but are called reed instruments. And all are truly dumb up against the lack of a word for actual, in the swamp reeds (except obligely at the second place of {xagri}). But, if we start getting upset about this kind of stuff, we will have to revise the whole glossary, since scarcely a definition lacks some similar nit-picky craziness. pc

Score: 0.00 Vote:
1 2 3 4 5
top of page

rlpowellPosted by rlpowell on Tue 13 of Jan., 2004 01:47 GMT posts: 14214

On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 05:37:11PM -0800, wikidiscuss@lojban.org wrote: > The definition for {xagri} is not half as weird as that for the > other two classes of wind instruments, which lack reeds but are > called reed instruments. And all are truly dumb up against the > lack of a word for actual, in the swamp reeds (except obligely at > the second place of {xagri}). But, if we start getting upset about > this kind of stuff, we will have to revise the whole glossary, > since scarcely a definition lacks some similar nit-picky > craziness.

I think you miss my point. I care little about the definition of xagri, but the key-word 'reed' is simply wrong. It's not craziness, and I'm not picking nits; lo xagri is *not* a reed, of any kind, in any sense.

-Robin

-- Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. "Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all from running out and eating all the cookies." — Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.lojban.org/ *** .i cimo'o prali .ui

Score: 0.00 Vote:
1 2 3 4 5
top of page

Posted by lojbab on Tue 02 of Mar., 2004 11:05 GMT posts: 162

Robin: >I think you miss my point. I care little about the definition of >xagri, but the key-word 'reed' is simply wrong. It's not craziness, >and I'm not picking nits; lo xagri is *not* a reed, of any kind, in >any sense.

Actually it is. Musicians call "reed instruments" "reeds" for short.

I have to remind people that the gismu keywords were NEVER intended to be definitional. They were intended to be something brief and distinctive to be typed into LogFlash, with preference given to the English word used to generate the gismu, if that is distinctive enough.

It was always intended that the full definition be used. This is in part because at best the keyword makes no note of place structures and thus is generally a "definition" for the x1 place. No gismu (or brivla) should EVER be considered "defined" unless the definition includes the place structure.

Unfortunately, after all this high-minded intention, it was decided to baseline the gismu list, with the keywords being part of the baseline and hence part of the language definition. This was back in 1992, and LogFlash is not necessarily the primary means by which people study the gismu anymore. Thus the primary purpose of the keywords is forgotten.

Colin Fine, later reviewed by Nora, came up with keywords for all the non-x1 places of the gismu. I think this file is called oblique.txt or something like that on the dictionary work files.

If the keywords are intended to be a short definition, then probably ALL of the gismu keywords including the oblique ones need to be reexamined for the purpose of consistently serving to briefly define the gismu, and all oblique keywords should be included in the definition and not just the x1 keyword.

In short, as a "to-do" item, this stands to open up more problems than it would solve.