sorry, but ...

[Roland Perry]

In article 
<CAN2jWyidaomKZy=HQkJ_iV-LGm7=3jeiFODEVj+U11qJVqgyfw at mail.gmail.com>, 
Adrian Midgley <amidgley at gmail.com> writes
>> The RIPA word is "communication" not message (my fault), and I do not think
>> the communication (as opposed to the packets or bits) is received until it
>> has all reached some destination.
>
>Perhaps a divergence, but I suspect the people making and interpreting
>these rules may be similar to those in a local bureacracy who were
>surprised when I remarked that their letters saying
>
>"We contacted X but received no reply"
>
>would better be phrased as "we wrote a letter to X...."
>
>IE the bureaucrat assumes that an action by them with no feedback of
>successful reception is a communication rather than a bottle thrown
>into the sea in the hope of a favourable current and an interested
>person on a far off beach - that communication is something they do
>rather than a handshake and exchange.

A message in a bottle is somewhat of a single thing that's sent, whereas 
smoke signals are also communications, and surely must be considered as 
having been sent long before the fire is put out and the final puff of 
smoke emitted? In other words, it's one of those "flows" I keep 
mentioning, where the reception takes place continuously rather than in 
one "lump".
-- 
Roland Perry