Subject: Re: EGLYSD class b
Date: Jan 05, 2006 @ 06:56
Author: aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
Prev Post in Topic Next [All Posts]
Prev Post in Time Next
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus" <lgm@w...> wrote:
>
> While the EGLYSD tripoint has almost certainly never been surveyed according to
> any datum whatsoever, it seems likely that other segments of the EGLY meridional
> boundary (farther north) and of EGSD (in the vicinity of the Nile Valley) have
> been surveyed and demarcated. Shouldn't the same datum that was used in those
> surveys be applied along the whole length of the respective meridian and
> parallel, since it has already been accepted by the parties?
>
> I am reminded that it was the ancient Egyptians who invented surveying to
> reestablish cadastral boundaries when the annual Nile floods erased landmarks.
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "aletheia kallos" <aletheiak@y...>
> To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:51 PM
> Subject: RE: [BoundaryPoint] Re: EGLYSD class b
>
>
> > nice stuff thanx
> > & please look for quite a few inserts ahead
> >
> > --- Hugh Wallis <hugh@o...> wrote:
> >
> >> >>thus as likely wgs84 as any<<
> >>
> >> definitely won't be WGS84 since that was not in use
> >> until 1984 (hence the
> >> "84" in its name).
> >
> > hahaha you certainly may disallow me & i knew dat
> > about 84
> > but i dont infer wgs84 should be ruled out for that
> > reason
> >
> > on the contrary i think the relative newness &
> > universality of wgs84 may especially recommend &
> > automatically promote it in this special case
> >
> > for diametrically unlike the maritime borders of
> > indonesia
> > where technical & legal complications create a
> > particular urgency to get all these datums clarified
> > the situation at eglysd smacks of complete
> > indifference & utter neglect over many decades
> >
> > & so i reason in the apparent absence of any evidence
> > of a specified datum for this point since its creation
> > in 1925 til the present
> > that it either remains unspecified until today & thus
> > highly subject to the wgs84 default principle
> > or else that any specificity it may have acquired
> > would most likely have occurred post 1984 & would thus
> > very likely be in the form of wgs84 for that reason as
> > well
> >
> > also where so many as 3 parties are involved universal
> > norms tend to be preferred to local ones
> >
> > your indonesia text says flat out
> > for its own special case but with universal
> > applicability in this case
> > wgs84 seems to be most sensible to adopt
> > &
> > all decisions should be legally agreed by all
> > countries involved
> >
> >> I suspect that the Egypt 1907 Datum might have been
> >> used
> >
> > but what in particular leads you to guess egypt 1907
> >
> > i can imagine egypt & sudan adopting it but not so
> > readily libya
> >
> >> - but see
> >>
> > <http://www.fig.net/pub/cairo/papers/ts_45/ts45_01_abidin_etal.pdf>
> >>
> > http://www.fig.net/pub/cairo/papers/ts_45/ts45_01_abidin_etal.pdf
> >> where it
> >> notes, using Indonesian maritime boundaries as its
> >> focus, that often the
> >> datum is NOT specifically denoted in a relevant
> >> treaty
> >
> > exactly my point as well as my guess here at eglysd
> > since day 1 in 1925 & even up to the present
> >
> >> and discusses the
> >> issues that arise as a result.
> >
> > yes naturally many in the worlds busiest seas but none
> > in the worlds most desolate wasteland
> >
> >> If you don't have
> >> time to read the whole
> >> paper
> >
> > who me
> > i have all the time in the world for such
> > deliciousness
> >
> >> the following section from the summary can
> >> help to understand the
> >> thesis:
> >>
> >> "The uncertainty in geodetic datum of boundary
> >> points introduces
> >> complications and problems
> >> in spatial management of Indonesia's maritime
> >> boundaries, since it can
> >> displace the boundary
> >> lines from their assumed true location. The
> >> displacements of boundaries in
> >> WGS84 datum are
> >> generally in the order of a few hundred meters, i.e.
> >> about 200 to 400 m,
> >
> > indeed did you notice 420m was the max they cited
> > later in the article
> >
> > sounds like your datum shift demo wants to take place
> > in the indonesian jungles
> >
> >> depending on the
> >> assumed original geodetic datum of the boundaries
> >> stated in the treaties.
> >> These boundary
> >> displacements are spatially advantageous for
> >> Indonesia in some cases and
> >> also
> >> disadvantageous in others."
> >
> > i also appreciated & hope you did too the specific
> > reference in this article to the attainment of
> > submeter level accuracy in pilotage by ecdis dgps in
> > 2004
> > which nicely fills in a blank space in our earlier
> > discussion here
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/18568
> >
> > end inserts
> > & sweet dreams
> >
> >
> >> The following paper might be relevant to EGLYSD -
> >>
> > http://www.asprs.org/resources/grids/06-2003-kenya.pdf
> >> - although it
> >> primarily refers to Kenya it also mentions the use
> >> of various datums in
> >> Egypt and the Sudan.
> >>
> >> Googling "latitude longitude datum egypt" will
> >> provide a host of other links
> >> too numerous to reproduce here that will provide a
> >> wealth of additional
> >> information.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _____
> >>
> >> From: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> >> [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
> >> On Behalf Of aletheiak
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:33 PM
> >> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> >> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: EGLYSD class b
> >>
> >>
> >> there is no mention in any of the relevant ibs
> >> numbers that the 1925 italian
> >> egyptian
> >> agreement establishing this tripoint or the 1934
> >> italo british egyptian
> >> agreement
> >> reaffirming it included any official maps or even
> >> specified any official
> >> datum or datums
> >>
> >> various british french american & north african maps
> >> of the 1930s thru 1960s
> >> tho are said
> >> there to reliably depict the various borders
> >> convergent here at eglysd
> >>
> >> & one cant conclude the datum is elusive for it
> >> might well just be the
> >> common &
> >> nonelusive default datum of
> >> none specified
> >> & thus as likely wgs84 as any
> >> in which case the try or rather the result would
> >> indeed be a very loose
> >> class b
> >> as represented by the little man in the gully in the
> >> first pic
> >> or more likely a tight class c at probably 14 meter
> >> range
> >> but if this is not correct
> >> then there remains some possibility of a class d or
> >> even class e
> >>
> >> for there also remains an outside chance that the
> >> tripoint is in fact marked
> >> whether by an official durable marker
> >> since some other parts of these remote borders are
> >> so marked
> >> or even by just some little cairn or something these
> >> folks could have missed
> >> since there is also no evidence that they were
> >> really studying the border
> >> alignments or
> >> trying for the tripoint in any other way than just
> >> for the lat long
> >> intersection
> >>
> >> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
> >> <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > wow
> >> > nicely done
> >> > & a pleasure to see the shots back on goal & the
> >> discussion back on target
> >> again
> >> >
> >> > & since all 3 ibs numbers
> >> > 10 & 18 & 61
> >> > join brownlie in indicating this tripoint is
> >> unmarked
> >> > or at least was unmarked as recently as 1979
> >> > it is hard to argue with the bona fides of their
> >> perfect gps readings
> >> > no matter what datum they may have been using
> >> >
> >> > but since even they are only claiming 14 meter
> >> range at best
> >> > & were having difficulty getting it
> >> > i think i would credit them only with a class c
> >> > as in seeing the objective for certain with their
> >> eyes
> >> > somehow
> >> > at some point
> >> > in their overall visitation process
> >> > rather than a class b
> >> > as in necessarily having been at the exact spot
> >> with their bodies
> >> > for i think that honor would remain to be won
> >> > in this unusual circumstance
> >> > by someone with a better quality gps receiver
> >> >
> >> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper
> >> Nielsen" <jesniel@i...>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks to the unknown visitor to Borderbase, who
> >> submitted the entry
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=22
> >> > > <http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=22
> >>
> > <http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=22&lon=25>
> >> &lon=25> &lon=25
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Jesper
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > >
> >> > > Borderbase - your online guide to international
> >> borders and tripoints
> >> > >
> >> > > http://www.nicolette.dk/borderbase
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _____
> >>
> >> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> * Visit your group "BoundaryPoint
> >> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint> " on
> >> the web.
> >>
> >>
> >> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >> BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >>
> > <mailto:BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> >> Yahoo! Terms of Service
> >>
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________
> > Yahoo! DSL - Something to write home about.
> > Just $16.99/mo. or less.
> > dsl.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>