congrats on both of you for bringing us to this new level
the millimetric level
of punctological refinement
the question of what happens to a tripoint when its marker warps
out is of course extremely interesting
especially for absolutists
we have seen far coarser examples at manyvt & arlatx
where the warp is in centimeters or even decimeters
& in those cases
as in all cases of advanced dilapidation
it seems clear that finding the true tripoint means mentally
reconstructing the original monumentation & intention
& i think that is probably right for all but the slightest warps
which presumably would not even be noticed
so
by the same token
in a case like this
where the marker may well have slightly disintegrated
as distinct from actually displacing horizontally
there doesnt appear to be any question what the original
monumentation & intention were
a clean straight tee or wye junction
whether only a stylized rationalization of natural borders
such as we saw in large at kytnva
or whether representating actual sight lines or invisible beelines
to other markers
or some combination of these possibilities
but in any case
the tripoint marker itself seems unequivocal
& any millimetric jog would appear to be out of the question for
this reason
but happily we will get some real eyeballs directly on this before
long
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Michael Kaufman
<mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> Yes indeed. I didn't notice this at all before, but
> now that you point it out I can see there is
> defitinely no dogleg at all: the lines are straight.
>
> Looking along the Swiss border - I think there is no
> dot at all. I think the line is continuous. Here is
> a combo photo - the B&W pic plus the pic from
> http://www.utfeldo.de/privat/prv_na00.htm . You can
> see there has been significant weathering. I think
> the color photo demonstrates the lines are most likely
> continous (no dot at the tp). Wish the photos could
> show more definition though.
>
> --- "Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > I think I can explain the apparent 1-cm offset in
> > the ATIT line on the top of
> > the stone. It is a spurious effect of lighting.
> >
> > The lines are carved as deep V-shaped channels in
> > the stone, and the lighting is
> > from the upper right. Thus the Swiss and Austrian
> > sides of both V's are in
> > shadow, while the Italian side of each is lit and
> > appears white. All you are
> > seeing here in this black-and-white photo are the
> > shadowed halves of each line,
> > while the actual boundaries lie in the bottom of
> > each V. The same offset effect
> > can be observed in the left serif of the letter "I"
> > for Italy.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Michael Kaufman" <mikekaufman79@y...>
> > To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 4:23 PM
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: atchit wasnt chfrit
> > -> Lost cairn?
> >
> >
> > > Is this the original photo of AT-CH-IT that was
> > lost?
> > > And it looks as if the AT-IT border take a slight
> > turn
> > > to the left before hitting the tp. If the tp is
> > the
> > > dot, then it is 1 cm or so to the left of where
> > the
> > > straight line AT-IT would hit CH. But it is a
> > black
> > > and white image and hard to tell, though it does
> > seem
> > > older (and thus less weathered) than the newer
> > color
> > > photos we have seen.
> > > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster
> http://search.yahoo.com