yikes
11 meters seems scarcely enough clearance for the minimum necessary 2
lanes of car traffic & pedestrian walkway etc
if there were only a single span
but i believe there is actually a double elevated roadway there
so i have to wonder
are you sure these points are indeed both clear of the entire
causeway construction
& if so
but even if not
then dont they effectively establish the position for any dry
boundary sector that should happen to arise upon or between or above
them anyway
in the absence of any other agreement
& to pursue the question of the idmysg tripoints if possible
since you have coords for these 2 points on mysg
would you also happen to have its terminal points
& would you know if they are they comparable to those of the idsg
terminal points
&or to the relevant idmy terminal points if any
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Martin Pratt" <m.a.pratt@d...>
wrote:
>
> Malaysia and Singapore signed a territorial sea boundary agreement
> in 1995 which provided geographical coordinates for a boundary
> originally established in 1927 as "an imaginary line following the
> centre of the deep-water channel in Johore Strait". The 1995
> agreement defines a boundary east and west of the causeway but
> otherwise makes no mention of the causeway itself - which suggests
> to me that the two governments treat the boundary on the causeway
as
> a (still to be defined?) land boundary. The nearest points on the
> territorial sea boundary to the causeway are at: 01d 27' 10.0"N,
> 103d 46' 16.0"E to the east of the causeway; and 01d 27' 09.8"N,
> 103d 46' 15.7"E to the west of the causeway (coordinates refer to
> the Revised Kertau Datum) - which, according to my rough
> calculations, leaves a gap of approximately 11 metres.
>
> m a r t i n