krtisfranks wrote:
> gleki wrote:

> > I'm opposed to making any nomenclature basic.
>
> You will have to explain what you mean by that.

ue oise'i.

I'm opposed to making any decisions regarding more appropriate or less
appropriate nomenclatures. They all have their reasoning.

> > For Lojbanizing Linnaean names a precise mechanism should be devised
> > preferably making conversion back from Lojban into Latin unambiguous
like
>
> > ROT13. I'm not sure whether that is possible unless we use pseudo-rafsi

> > prefixes.
>
> I would like to work on such a project. I think that we can make
guidelines
> that work often, and then there might be exceptional cases that cannot be

> mapped blindly. "serlaximorfa" is actually such a word: the taxon's
name
> is actually "Selachimorpha", without the first "r".

it could be tselaximorfa under la snura ideology.

https://mw.lojban.org/papri/Rule:_respect_the_form_of_words

But again it won't restore Selachimorpha back. Even these x and f. How
do you know they were "ch" and "ph", why not "kh"/"h" and "f"?