What I don't get is there's been an active objection to using simple 16V8/22V10s which only require the same tools as the EEPROMs on the same board to program. They would replace tons of 74xx logic. Objections range from they aren't historical period (Vs aren't - but Rs & Ls are), to it's not in the spirit of the project, to this citation from the N8VEM FAQ written by you:
"Custom programmable devices (except for boot EPROM) such as GALs, PALs, FPGAs, etc are out as those devices are difficult for many hobbyists to get without the special tools required to program them."
Granted the LAVA 10 doesn't apply specifically as it comes pre-programmed. I just find it odd that just because a commercial company packages a pre-programmed and assembled but otherwise objectionable solution together, it's ok? I'm fairly certain that if I started selling pre-programmed 22V10s as a custom "N8VEM address decoder and wait state generator IC", many people, including you, would have a problem replacing a dozen 74xx chips with it at an ideological level.
I'm 100% behind what you've done with the SVAG board. And I realize its a temporary solution to a bigger problem. However make no mistake the LAVA 10 board is just a general purpose +3.3V FPGA module that has nothing to do with video output other than what it happens to come pre-programmed with from Mylium. It doesn't even have the DAC on board. It's a slippery slope to stand-on and I feel it needs some clarification and specific direction from the N8VEM project leaders like you and John and open discussion amongst the members.
It would be nice if these sorts of possibilities are now open and the SVAG board becomes more than just a stop-gap until the intended VGA solution materializes, to start a sub-project within N8VEM to essentially remake it with more altruistic goals: 100% open source/hardware design, LDO and I/O level translators built in maintaining DIP form factor, and perhaps a more discrete focus towards emulating a period video ASIC at an RTL level (baseline VGA perhaps).