It would seem that "automatic" is a word that provokes un-helpful discussion. Since no meaningful discussion can be held without shared terms and meanings, maybe we could consider the following definitions rather than using the nebulous and diverse "automatic":
Unattended: Cases where there is no operator present in any meaningful sense. (I am not implying that this is legal or illegal, merely defining terms) Multiplexed:Cases (such as APRS, certain parts of ALE, etc) where the frequency may be shared among different protocols all expecting burst transmissions and possibly implementing ARQ or other methods of surviving interference. Programmatic: Appropriate in any case where there is a protocol controlling the contents of transmissions, (as opposed to strictly-brain-interpreted methods; after all, one *could* implement a packet BBS interface in international Morse over CW. It would be programmatic since the person would have to do what the BBS expected) Most multiplexed protocols and conversations are of course programmatic. A case where this is not so would be keyboard-to-keyboard over unproto ax.25packets. That would be multiplexed but not programmatic. Not all programmatic protocols are multiplexed: any single-user BBS interface, for example, is not multiplexed. Any criticisms or improvements needed? -- Regards, Robert Thompson
