--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "granthutchison" <granthutchison@b...>
wrote:
> Michael:
> > there you have the reason grant for my evidently mistaken surmise
of
> > your meaning above because i imagined you were talking & playing
> > straight bp too as you usually do
> Not mistaken at all: I was originally looking to use "pene-enclave"
as
> a strictly topological designator (an enclave joined to the parent
> entity or another enclave at a single point), and would have used it
> as such if Brendan hadn't fixed my misapprehension. It leaves us, as
> you say, with a need for a name for the topological, strictly BP
item
> of which we now have four on land and one at sea at the EEZ level.
And
> I do like your coining clavicle, which a bit of Latin etymology
would
> link to clavicula, a tendril - and what is a point connection but
the
> limiting case of a tendril?
thanx & glad you like clavicle
& i think clavicula is great too
perhaps to be reserved for only the most delicate or maritime tendrils
> > & i would add tho not to you grant
> Good of you to specifically exclude me, but are you and I not as
> guilty as anyone, after our recent off-message straying into
palindromes?
yes i agree but only because i dont think anyone is guilty of
anything & i disagree because we were try pointing all the way with
those pals man & our tries were magnificent tries actually rather
than just gabbing pointlessly so we are even less guilty than that
& even if someone didnt care for pals or sawanabori or philately as
much as we or i do then they could look away from that message & send
us some of what they like trying better but still i do urge us all to
rally around our basic multipointing commonality & to relate
discussions to it & use it as the touchstone of relevancy or it seems
to me we will have no clear common focus nor any common endeavor at
all
m