[humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema-channel

[cognite@zianet.com]

Re "channel":  to sum up the analysis below based on prior work of the
committee, we Might be able to reduce to:

        a channel would be a conduit of message-bearing energy. (concrete)
        a signal would be message-bearing energy.  (concrete)

        a message would be  ...?        [presupposed term, definition needed]

But we need further info: How are these supposed to be used in secondaries?
Are these characterizations sufficient for that?  


DISCUSSION:

At 07:02 AM 24-05-2002 -0700, Rex Brooks wrote:
"
It is described [in the StrawMan draft] as Human Communication Channel as
senses or faculties byt which a Human communicates a message.

...

channel be somewhat more explicitly defined so 
that communication is understood such that a channel represents the 
ability to receive as well as to send a message. While the dictionary 
does include notions of sharing information, the definitions are 
preponderantly on the side of transmitting more than receiving, and I 
think that needs to be explicitly made clear.
"

This gives a picture on the order of a channel as a transmission mode
between sender and receiver, right?  Something like:


        :-| --- / channel=?=method, location(s), time-lag,... ---> :-(
        ;-| --- /"                              ---> 8-)
        :-) --- /"                              ---> :-)
        >:-( ---/"                              ---> :-(

To the point, what is the "channel" in each of these message "transmissions"?
(They move from traditional to multimedia communication in several groupings.)

- a conversation between people in different rooms?
- a face-to-face conversation? 
- a smoke signal?  a mirror signal?  a satellite signal?

(Note that receiving faculties are not necessarily symmetrical with sending
faculties.  There may be offset geoLocations.  Conversations are not
necessarily between only two people.  Does the channel exist independently
of them?)


- a phone conversation?
- an answering machine message?
- a hardcopy letter?
- a printed book?
- the transmission of a message by email?  

(There may be offset temporalLocations.  Intermediaries, both "human" body
"faculties" and thru tools:  How much of the phone equipment/transmission
constitutes "channel"?  Is the channel the same for nonwireless, cellular,
satellite, CB, )


- an instant replay (immediate, delayed, repeated)
- a RealPlay reception?
- a program download?
- a radio listener? (to canned, live, and mixed programs, w/wo immediate
direct personal access among interlocutors)

(Apprehension may be Very different from 'sending'.  Is reception required
for a "channel" to exist?  Is apprehension/comprehension required?  Is a
message required?)

To decide how huml wants to define it, we need to answer some questions.  

What is the importance of "channel" for the usability of our schema?
Perhaps that it may limit message types, and properties of the situation?
...For instance the message from a tenth repetition face-to-face and thru
re-reading may change even with the same signal and signal-sensors --
because of memory, and related effects on the parties' "faculties".... Has
the "channel" changed?

How does this [information theory] term relate to semiotics'?   In
particular, I'm curious as to its relation to "signal".

Our StrawMan inventory includes "signal", so we have a good point of departure:

"An interruption in a field of constant energy transfer.  An example is the
dots and dashes that open and close the electromagnetic field of a telegraph
circuit.  The basic function of such signals is to provide ... the change of
a single environmental factor to attract attention and to transfer meaning."

The word "transfer" here for "signal" is akin to the
"transmitting...receiving" of "channel".  The two seem therefore to be
cross-referential, if not overlapped.  

A minor point. The StrawMan denomination of "signal" as "abstract"
contradicts the concreteness of the amperage pulses constituting dots and
dashes.  (Common usage in physics and engineering is "signal" for concrete
energy.  So let's assume that.)  

Communication "channels" have become increasingly complex, as the set of
examples above shows. In multi-mode transmissions, the form the signal takes
changes.  For example, it changes as it goes from mouth airwave vibrations
to microphone to wires carrying clipped electrical renderings ... to phone
speaker at the ear.  It is transformed more times than in the simplest vocal
communication.

If the signal is the concrete form of energy, then perhaps the "channel" is
the energy conduit?  The forms taken by the signal and handled by the
conduit must match all along the way.   Do we need an arbitrary limit on a
channel's being external to the body?

So, to sum, what this seems to be reducible to is:

        a channel would be a conduit of message-bearing energy. (concrete)
        a signal would be message-bearing energy.  (concrete)

        a message would be  ...?  [presupposed term, definition needed]

Assessment points:

Seems good that these are coherent as a group, for the sake of consistency
in a schema.  In talking about things we do seem to use the term "message" a
lot. Is it a basic one? Anybody have a good definition of "message" or some
such?

And -- How are these supposed to be used in secondaries?  Are these
characterizations sufficient for those uses?  Are they the ones that would
be easiest for people to use? If not, what would be a propos?


SC
Hey, more questions, the research endemic...but at least these are kinda
specific ;)