Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] continued haply ever after<br/>
Date: Aug 06, 2000 @ 20:34<br/>
Author: David Mark (David Mark &lt;dmark@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="298.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="302.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic284.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="300.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="302.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-190850763">On Sun, 6 Aug 2000, michael donner wrote:<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; &gt;So, the tri-country points are very interesting.<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; definitely<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; do you have any opinions or suggestions about how these should be<br/>
&gt; inventoried or otherwise collected<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>As a first cut I&#39;d find someone who has loaded up international boundaries<br/>
in a geographic information system, and then get a listing of all the<br/>
&quot;nodes&quot;. If someone has loaded NIMA&#39;s &quot;Digital Chart of the World&quot;, that<br/>
was based on 1:1,000,000-scale ONCs (Operational Navigation Charts),<br/>
fairly detailed. That would provide a working hypothesis on the<br/>
trinational points, and then one would need to do painstaking checking<br/>
from more detailed sources.  I&#39;ll see if one of our grad students could do<br/>
the first approximation. <br/>
<br/>
David</div>