Difference between revisions of "BPFK Checkpoints"

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
From 14:00 to 18:00 on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday.
+
 
 +
See [[jbocre: baupla fuzykamni|baupla fuzykamni]] and [[BPFK Procedures|BPFK Procedures]].
 +
 
 +
==  Current Checkpoint ==
 +
 
 +
===  Attitudinals ===
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Digressives|Digressives]] SEI SEhU TO TOI (Shepherd: [[User:Jorge Llambías|Jorge Llambias]])
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Realis Attitudinals|Realis Attitudinals]] UI1realis (Shepherd: [[User:Jorge Llambías|Jorge Llambias]])
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Irrealis Attitudinals|Irrealis Attitudinals]] UI1irrealis (Shepherd: [[User:Jorge Llambías|Jorge Llambias]])
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Evidentials|Evidentials]] UI2 (Shepherd: Arnt Johansen)
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Discursives|Discursives]] UI3 (Shepherd: Arnt Johansen)
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Text Structure Discursives|Text Structure Discursives]] UI3a UI3c UI6 (Shepherd: [[User:Jorge Llambías|Jorge Llambias]])
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Highlight Discursives|Highlight Discursives]] UI3b (Shepherd: [[User:Jorge Llambías|Jorge Llambias]])
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Attitudinal Specifiers|Attitudinal Specifiers]] UI4 UI7 FUhE FUhO (Shepherd: Adam Lopresto)
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Attitudinal Modifiers|Attitudinal Modifiers]] UI5 (Shepherd: [[jbocre: bancus|Theodore Reed]])
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Intensifiers|Intensifiers]] CAI (Shepherd: [[jbocre: bancus|Theodore Reed]])
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Vocatives|Vocatives]] COI DOI DOhU  (Shepherd: [[User:Jorge Llambías|Jorge Llambias]])
 +
 
 +
==  Previous Checkpoints ==
 +
* [[BPFK Checkpoint: BAI #1]], Completed 16 Jun 2005
 +
* [[BPFK Checkpoint: Magic Words #1]], Completed 11 Feb 2005.
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Checkpoint: gadri #1]], completed 25 Dec 2004 (Christmas present).
 +
* [[BPFK Checkpoint: Letterals #1]], completed 17 March 2004.
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Checkpoint: Aspect #1]], completed 24 May 2004.
 +
 
 +
==  Proposed Future Checkpoints ==
 +
 
 +
===  Morphology ===
 +
 
 +
This has been deferred due to not being as done as I thought.
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: PEG Morphology Algorithm]] Jorge Llambias
 +
* By extension, [[jbocre: Controversial points in the morphology|Controversial points in the morphology]]
 +
 
 +
* Both are linked from [[BPFK Section: Formal Morphology]]
 +
 
 +
===  Erasures ===
 +
 
 +
While the interactions of all the other magic words were ironed out
 +
 
 +
in the Magic Words checkpoint, a rather interesting counter-proposal
 +
 
 +
for SA was suggested.  We're going to need to play with it a bit
 +
 
 +
more and decide on it later.
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Erasures|Erasures]] SI SA SU
 +
 
 +
===  Poor CEI ===
 +
 
 +
CEI got left out of subordinators by accident; should do a definition for it too.
 +
 
 +
===  Pro-sumti ===
 +
 
 +
Deferred due to lack of interest.
 +
 
 +
====  Sections ====
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Logical Variables|Logical Variables]] KOhA1
 +
** Not sure this one belongs here.  Let the jatna know if you have an opinion one way or the other.
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Utterance Pro-sumti|Utterance Pro-sumti]] KOhA2
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Personal Pro-sumti|Personal Pro-sumti]] KOhA3
 +
 
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Anaphoric Pro-sumti|Anaphoric Pro-sumti]] KOhA4 KOhA5 KOhA6
 +
* [[BPFK Section: Grammatical Pro-sumti|Grammatical Pro-sumti]] KOhA7 KOhA8
 +
 
 +
===  Far future: Experimental cmavo  ===
 +
 
 +
In response to xorxes' handling of the xa'o issue in the first Aspect checkpoint, the jatna has decided that when most everything else is wrapped up, we'll have a checkpoint just for figuring out how many experimental cmavo have been seriously reccomended by Shepherds for official status.  As such, the jatna strongly reccomends that Shepherds do not include experimental cmavo in their proposals, but instead include links to experimental cmavo that they consider potentially worthy of official status.
 +
 
 +
===  Far future: Pre-Rump Mega-Vote ===
 +
 
 +
At some point, the BPFK needs to declare itself finished with producing cmavo definitions and whatever else it ends up doing.  IOW, it needs to get to the point where the entire group can look at the language and say, "OK, *that* is a well-specified language".  This is not to occur until after every section has been in a completed checkoint.  It then devolves into a rump committee for future unforseen emergencies.
 +
 
 +
When this blessed time period seems to have arrived, the jatna will call for the Pre-Rump Mega-Vote.  This will be a non-time-limited mass discussion in which every single section of the language is open for debate, to continue until consensus minus one is reached.  The goal is to iron out any outstanding conflicts between sections.  Hopefully this won't take long.  The jatna reserves the right to place time limits on "No" votes without reasons attached, i.e. if you claim that you simply need more time to read up, and everyone else is done, the jatna may give you a time limit of some kind.

Revision as of 16:43, 4 November 2013

See baupla fuzykamni and BPFK Procedures.

Current Checkpoint

Attitudinals

Previous Checkpoints

Proposed Future Checkpoints

Morphology

This has been deferred due to not being as done as I thought.

Erasures

While the interactions of all the other magic words were ironed out

in the Magic Words checkpoint, a rather interesting counter-proposal

for SA was suggested. We're going to need to play with it a bit

more and decide on it later.

Poor CEI

CEI got left out of subordinators by accident; should do a definition for it too.

Pro-sumti

Deferred due to lack of interest.

Sections

  • Logical Variables KOhA1
    • Not sure this one belongs here. Let the jatna know if you have an opinion one way or the other.

Far future: Experimental cmavo

In response to xorxes' handling of the xa'o issue in the first Aspect checkpoint, the jatna has decided that when most everything else is wrapped up, we'll have a checkpoint just for figuring out how many experimental cmavo have been seriously reccomended by Shepherds for official status. As such, the jatna strongly reccomends that Shepherds do not include experimental cmavo in their proposals, but instead include links to experimental cmavo that they consider potentially worthy of official status.

Far future: Pre-Rump Mega-Vote

At some point, the BPFK needs to declare itself finished with producing cmavo definitions and whatever else it ends up doing. IOW, it needs to get to the point where the entire group can look at the language and say, "OK, *that* is a well-specified language". This is not to occur until after every section has been in a completed checkoint. It then devolves into a rump committee for future unforseen emergencies.

When this blessed time period seems to have arrived, the jatna will call for the Pre-Rump Mega-Vote. This will be a non-time-limited mass discussion in which every single section of the language is open for debate, to continue until consensus minus one is reached. The goal is to iron out any outstanding conflicts between sections. Hopefully this won't take long. The jatna reserves the right to place time limits on "No" votes without reasons attached, i.e. if you claim that you simply need more time to read up, and everyone else is done, the jatna may give you a time limit of some kind.