Re: BPFK Section: lerfu Shifts
I will vote "yes" so as not to stand in the way of progress.
However:
The definitions of ga'e and that of the other equivalent words, includint to'a, are not parallel. There is a little more detail about scope in the ga'e definition. In a dictionary, these entries will not be grouped together; so, really, the extra detail should also be included in the other definitions.
As to the non-usage: A likely interpretive convention (a usage Bob says was intended to be allowed for), and one that does not contradict any of the grammar, is that a parenthetical shift or font-and-face change that is not followed by lerfu would be taken as applying to the words - sort of like a mark-up language. For example: "to'i ga'e toi mi to'i to'a toi klama" would be "MI klama". This convention might mean that these words would get used more in the future.