Xiaoshu Wang wrote > Second, information is embedded in a message, i..e, it is the > content of the message, yes? > > > [Noah Mendelsohn wrote]: > > > > No. Assuming binary coding is used, the message is a > sequence of bits. It > > is presumed that the sender and receiver agree in advance on > the range of > > possible information values (my term, not Shannon's), that a > given message > > might convey; each distinct message essentially selects one of those > > values. From Shannon's 1948 paper [1]: > > > I take the 'no' means that the message is not embedded? Your original quote was that "information is embedded in a message." I was saying "no" to that; I don't believe it is best to think of information being "embedded" in a message. Presuming that the sending and receiving parties share the necessary assumptions about encoding, messages >convey< or >transmit< information, I would think. Noah -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2007 20:58:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:56:10 GMT