Subject: Re: Interesting note on attribution and OSD #10
From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 14:23:07 -0500

Rick Moen scripsit:

> At that point, OSI's Board says, "Oh, right.  Forgot about
> the implied need for technological neutrality, as that clause requiring
> notification via telegram is looking pretty silly about now."

Yeah.  Even the Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams, which is
where you report your newly discovered asteroid or comet, now only
accepts email (plain ASCII with line breaks required, good on them)
at cbat@cfa.harvard.edu, although the name is unlikely to change.
They haven't had TWX facilities since 1995; "discontinued for lack of use".

-- 
John Cowan   cowan@ccil.org   http://ccil.org/~cowan
I must confess that I have very little notion of what [s. 4 of the British
Trade Marks Act, 1938] is intended to convey, and particularly the sentence
of 253 words, as I make them, which constitutes sub-section 1.  I doubt if
the entire statute book could be successfully searched for a sentence of
equal length which is of more fuliginous obscurity. --MacKinnon LJ, 1940