> i am hoping that the mapsurfer or someone else better equipped with the
> hard data than ourselves can tell us for sure here
Dunno about Singapore but I'll admit I didn't think about islands.
One could wonder about any weirdnesses in all those Pacific
Island groups. There's at least one quad point in there the way
my map is drawn; I don't know if y'all are counting them -- I'd
vote no of course.
> i still think that denmark in its capacity as greenland could at the very
> least & without ever having to negotiate with anyone make a unilateral
> sector claim to a share of the north pole just as russia & liberal elements
> of the canadian government have already done
> so as to produce with them a rather hypothetical yet still somewhat real
> cadkru point
One would consider using iso codes for territories where iso
codes exist, even if the territory under consideration
(Greenland in this case) doesn't fit one's exact definition
of a "country"
People debate what is a country and what is not all the time,
depending on where they are from, their geography schooling,
and their world view. Without debating on whether or not
Greenland is in fact a "country" on this list, suffice it to
say that some will say it is and some will say that it is not
and on some lists it will be and on other lists it will be
not. The elegant way to handle these debates in a neutral
way without passing (potentially offensive) judgement on
whether a particular territory is a "country" is to use the
iso code if it exists for the territory. (Of course, I've
always preferred the term territory to country anyway).
(I suppose one could peruse the iso list for nasty exceptions,
I cannot think of any from memory but I, as always, may be
wrong)
--
randy "the mapsurfer"