Dscript + Lojban ???

[la .lindar.]

We only have words to support hex and lower. You're welcome to do anything you'd like, but the official writing system shall remain Roman. We have a number of alternate scripts already, so perhaps look at how those have been done? As long as you understand that we're not going to adopt your script and likely nobody will help you because we have a lot of other stuff to do you're welcome to do whatever you'd like. Post examples when it's done as it looks rather interesting.

(Sorry if I seem curt, but you are by no means the first person to come along and want to adopt a writing system for Lojban. We get one of you every couple of months and they never stick around.)

http://youtube.com/user/rogicallanguagegroup/ Check out the video lessons if you want to start learning right away.

[Jonathan Jones]

"R"ogical?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/Y6pXHvIObvQJ.

To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

[Jacob Errington]

On 6 September 2012 18:44, la .lindar. <lindar...@gmail.com> wrote:

We only have words to support hex and lower. You're welcome to do anything you'd like, but the official writing system shall remain Roman. 

Strictly speaking, there is no official writing system. Any writing system that can unambiguously refer to each of lojban's sounds is valid, but none is official. The Roman writing system, albeit the most widespread and de facto official script, is not *technically* official.

Sorry to pick nits here, but I don't like seeing anyone being mislead, even those who are unlikely to even really learn much lojban.

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

 

(Sorry if I seem curt, but you are by no means the first person to come along and want to adopt a writing system for Lojban. We get one of you every couple of months and they never stick around.)

http://youtube.com/user/rogicallanguagegroup/ Check out the video lessons if you want to start learning right away.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

[Jonathan Jones]

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6 September 2012 18:44, la .lindar. <lindar...@gmail.com> wrote:

We only have words to support hex and lower. You're welcome to do anything you'd like, but the official writing system shall remain Roman. 

Strictly speaking, there is no official writing system. Any writing system that can unambiguously refer to each of lojban's sounds is valid, but none is official. The Roman writing system, albeit the most widespread and de facto official script, is not *technically* official.

Sorry to pick nits here, but I don't like seeing anyone being mislead, even those who are unlikely to even really learn much lojban.

Um, you happen to be wrong on this one. The Lojban orthography which uses the Roman script /is/ the official one, both "technically" and in reality. It is not merely the "de facto" one.
 

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

 

(Sorry if I seem curt, but you are by no means the first person to come along and want to adopt a writing system for Lojban. We get one of you every couple of months and they never stick around.)

http://youtube.com/user/rogicallanguagegroup/ Check out the video lessons if you want to start learning right away.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/Y6pXHvIObvQJ.

To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

[Jacob Errington]

Huh weird. I'm trying to find out where I might have gotten the notion initially, but I can't seem to find it. Oh well.

[la .lindar.]

Sorry, http://youtube.com/user/logicallanguagegroup/

Phone keyboard fail.

[la gleki]

On Friday, September 7, 2012 4:26:38 AM UTC+4, tsani wrote:

Huh weird. I'm trying to find out where I might have gotten the notion initially, but I can't seem to find it. Oh well.

Let's make all scripts unofficial in CLL 2.0 )))

[John E. Clifford]

Really bad policy.  Pick one familiar one and work in it entirely or you will drive away more people than you can count.  Lojban is hard enough to learn without learning a new alphabet ( or several! ) from the getgo. Even aUI, which functioned with only slightly weirded Latin alphabet, stubbled early and often because there was always another, "real", alphabet looming.

Sent from my iPad

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/N4EGRpJDXUMJ.

[la gleki]

On Friday, September 7, 2012 8:56:22 AM UTC+4, clifford wrote:

Really bad policy.  Pick one familiar one and work in it entirely or you will drive away more people than you can count.  Lojban is hard enough to learn without learning a new alphabet ( or several! ) from the getgo. Even aUI, which functioned with only slightly weirded Latin alphabet, stubbled early and often because there was always another, "real", alphabet looming.

Well, just was kidding. Latin alphabet  will be used anyway.

But nobody should divert loi jbopre from creating new scripts. Lojban is a hobby for so'a jbopre.

[Betsemes]

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 6 September 2012 18:44, la .lindar. <lindar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> We only have words to support hex and lower. You're welcome to do
>>> anything you'd like, but the official writing system shall remain Roman.
>>
>> Strictly speaking, there is no official writing system. Any writing system
>> that can unambiguously refer to each of lojban's sounds is valid, but none
>> is official. The Roman writing system, albeit the most widespread and de
>> facto official script, is not *technically* official.
>>
>> Sorry to pick nits here, but I don't like seeing anyone being mislead,
>> even those who are unlikely to even really learn much lojban.
>
> Um, you happen to be wrong on this one. The Lojban orthography which uses
> the Roman script /is/ the official one, both "technically" and in reality.
> It is not merely the "de facto" one.

As per this: http://mail.lojban.org/lists/lojban-list/msg26595.html,
back on Thu, 6 Jul 2006 16:54:33 there was no official
alphabet/orthography and both Robin and Jorge weren't inclined to
approve one. Have this changed? Is there now an officially approved
one?

mu'o mi'e betsemes

[John E. Clifford]

De facto carries a lot of weight and the practicalities of teaching and recruiting even more. The Latin version is standard for all external and most internal purposes, but other systems fill a deep aesthetic need in many people and always have a place in Lojban.

Sent from my iPad

[Jorge Llambías]

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Huh weird. I'm trying to find out where I might have gotten the notion
> initially, but I can't seem to find it. Oh well.

Maybe from this discussion: http://tinyurl.com/8j92k6p

mu'o mi'e xorxes

[John E Clifford]

Thanks.  We appreciate your efforts and welcome your script for its aesthetic -- and perhaps eventually practical -- value.  If we seem a little touchy, it is -- as someone has noted -- that conlangs are liable to be approached by conglyphers whose interest is mainly in seeing their glyphery in use, not in the language they are offering it to, and who, consequently, don't stick around long.  As a practical matter, I would offer your glyphery to a variety of conlangs -- always as an interesting flourish, not as a compelling replacement, as most conlangs rather like that sort of thing (it is a part -- not really even peripheral -- of coning). 

BTW, why do you skip the historically and mathematically significant base 60 system (covered by the 100, I suppose)?

---

From: vasten <vast...@gmail.com>
To: loj...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 10:46 PM
Subject: [lojban] Re: Dscript + Lojban ???

really? ok

well... please judge me based on merit as opposed to prejudice.

Dscript is not some little "font", i have put a decade into it, and im not joking around when I say I am interested in applying to Lojban.

Lojban is the first I have approached, been thinking long and hard about whether to tie myself to a langauge, and if so which one. (tie in the sense that i would have to invest alot fo my time, dscript of course will always work for any alphabet)

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/hunwMPsZfD0J.

[CosmicRay]

I really like it - I haven't looked at many alternate writing systems but of those I have this seems to be well engineered and thought out.

I'd very much like to use it - Ali, if you're watching this thread, how about using Dscript for a particular inscription we need doing... ?

kozmikreis

--

Sent from my iPhone

On 7 Sep 2012, at 04:46, vasten <vast...@gmail.com> wrote:

really? ok

well... please judge me based on merit as opposed to prejudice.

Dscript is not some little "font", i have put a decade into it, and im not joking around when I say I am interested in applying to Lojban.

Lojban is the first I have approached, been thinking long and hard about whether to tie myself to a langauge, and if so which one. (tie in the sense that i would have to invest alot fo my time, dscript of course will always work for any alphabet)


On Friday, September 7, 2012 6:44:52 AM UTC+8, la .lindar. wrote:

--

[banseljaj]

hey koz. Yeah, it looks good.

vasten, we would like to help you develop the new lojban script. :)

DScript looks awesome btw.