hahahahaha
ahh thank you randy
& no i wasnt confused
just stumped
i do feel fairly confident tho that i understand you better now
& also that you mean by yus southernmost component montenegro
but please do spill some more beans on
1 the tcc
2 the su iirc &
3 the ref to soap
since you have been good enough to deal us these 3 new blanks
& i know from our experience to date that they will be interesting
or you wouldnt have mentioned them
i mean like 331 distinct places to go sounds like bliss itself
a friend of mine claimed to have gone whoring in triple digits of countries
last time i saw him many years ago
& i believe him
& wonder what a lofty number he may have reached by now if reckoning in tcc
what a goose
& i believe there are 557 recognized indian reservations in the united
states alone if he ever gets bored with that
also i dont know what it is that causes a territory that is not already
generally recognized as a sovereign country to acquire its own iso code
but it would appear at least that some aspiration is prerequisite on the
part of someone in that place or elsewhere
aspiration either to political independence or well just to creating the
freakin diglyph
presumably for some other reason
antarctica or aq comes to mind as a particularly enigmatic example
& please remember i am newer to iso than you & could still use & would
certainly like a good introductory lecture on it
but my uneducated guess is that somebody wanted that aq to happen
& to happen for some reason
perhaps but not necessarily geopolitical independence
for that is presently ridiculous in the case of antarctica
yet for some sensible or insensible reason
or it wouldnt have happened
the fact that the montenegro as well as the serbia components of yugoslavia
are like texas or alaska in not having individual iso codes but rather in
being included within the larger national entities
such as of yu or us as the case may be
perhaps means or implies that all these & any similar such entities are
presently involved in satisfactory enough associations that they do not
desire nor warrant such special & separate national treatments &
recognitions
this is not to say that satisfactorily associated territories couldnt
possibly have isos under any circumstances
but just that the absence of separate codes gives some reason to suppose a
happy national union
the way you were thinking tho does help me to want to refine the term
imminent to something more politically neutral & accurate like
arguably either or both real &or possibly imminent
what would you think of that
or can you perhaps find a simpler & more elegant truth here
m
>
>
>One expected yu's southernmost component to have its own iso
>code. tp had its iso code long before at least some people
>thought perhaps it should; that is what lead me to take for
>granted it that it did as well, alleviating the need for the
>scheme to disambiguate the names and being consistent with
>the neutral idea of deciding a "territory" is something with
>an iso code (which I'm not exactly pushing but its the way
>I was thinking (I actually in my own travels use the TCC
>list which has 331 entries last time I checked, not counting
>tp :-))
>
>Since ps has its own iso code, one could neutrally count that
>without making a political statement and promote it from
>"imminent" to "verified" (assuming it is actually verified,
>of course, but its borders at best seem ambiguous to some in
>the first place I imagine)
>
>Adding to the confusion is the possibility (likelyhood? again
>without making a political statement) that in the near future
>yu's southern component will in fact have its own iso code,
>and yu as an iso code will go away (irrelevant but a real
>possibility -- it did happen to su iirc) making the whole
>twin tripoint as "unimminent" as iljops is "imminent" (or
>something like that)
>
>Confused? You won't be after this episode of _Soap_ :-)
>
>--
>randy "the mapsurfer"
>
>michael donner wrote:
>>
>> now you have me completely stumped randy
>>
>> & i am only guessing at your meaning here
>>
>> i assume you are saying tp for east timor
>> & that you are questioning the actuality of the bahryu pair mentioned below
>> & also the imminence of the iljops pair or pairs mentioned farther below
>> while perhaps referring to the iso list as a whole
>> whether the one posted as our bottom link
>> <http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/codlstp1/en_listp1.html>
>>http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/codlstp1/en_listp1.html
>> or some other rendition
>> i dont know
>>
>> & dont understand
>>
>> but cwould you say more & help me out
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> bahryun & bahryus
>> >> bosnia croatia yugoslavia
>> >
>> >If we have an "imminent" category, need we
>> >an "unimminent" category, or would it be better
>> >to avoid anything that can be misconstrued as
>> >a political view in both cases? Who knows
>> >who wiill be first ... (I'll admit that I
>> >am surprised that there is no ISO code
>> >here; TP has been around for ages)
>> >
>> >> >imminent
>> >> & possibly compound
>> >> >iljopsn & iljopss
>> >> > israel jordan palestine
>> >
>> >--
>> >randy "the mapsurfer"