Grant,
I'm not ticked off in the least. I'm not even sure what topic I
would be ticked off about. Maybe you have a guilty conscience. Or,
wait a minute, maybe I should be ticked off about something.
BJB
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "Grant Hutchison" <granthutchison@c...>
wrote:
> > feet in mouth
> >
> > m
>
> Ummmmm...
> Sorry...
> I've no idea why you're sorry. Did I sound vexed? (What's the
written
> equivalent of "sound"?)
> Typical bloody text communication - I seem to have made you feel
told
> off and BJB feel ticked off in a single 24hr period, without ever
> intending either. (Maybe emoticons would help, but someone would
> doubtless tell me off for using them.)
> You must always imagine me spreading wide my arms and shrugging,
> rather than wagging an admonitory finger - I'm a shrugging kind of
> guy. (It's my default stance.)
>
> > i wonder if just thickening the concave side of the eez lines to
a
> > width of 188nm
> But sadly the only relic I have of all this overnight processing is
> the final cylindrical map image, which is at much lower res than
the
> data from which it derives - a couple of hundred pixels as against
a
> few tens of thousands of data points (lin). The final image has
> blurred out all the fine coastal wiggles (which was grand because I
> wanted them gone because I couldn't track which were baselined and
> which weren't). Trying to put them in again in the way you suggest
> would be like ... well, trying to start a game of chess again from
an
> out-of-focus image of move 20.
>
> Wondering where the bishop is:
>
> Grant