Subject: Re: Another Büsingen map & those rules
Date: Nov 26, 2001 @ 20:41
Author: orc@orcoast.com (orc@...)
Prev Post in Topic Next [All Posts]
Prev Post in Time Next
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "Peter Smaardijk" <smaardijk@y...> wrote:
> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "L. A. Nadybal" <lnadybal@h...> wrote:
> > One has to ask about the purpose of a map, given what the results
> are
> > of these last messages about Busingen. It seems a border stone on
> the
> > south side of a road marks a point in the middle of a road. If a
> map
> > is to show physical characteristics of a site, then the actual
> > placement of the border stone is what should be shown - but if the
> > border it represents is in the middle of a road, then the border
> > shown on a map should not merely be a "connect the dots"
> exercize...
> > the border should be shown slightly north of the marker... unless
> of
> > course you choose the metal plate in the street and not the stone
> > marker as the item to show on the map... or maybe one should show
> > both.
>
> Hear, hear. Rule one I can live with. You can't expect locals to know
> everything about the place they live in. Rules no. 2 and 3
> (inaccurate maps & markers) are inexcusable. Of course, with maps,
> scale is always an issue, but when scale allows accuracy, a map
> should be accurate. Period.
>
> Peter S.