> which areas of the world are not included in your survey due to
their
> various problems of indeterminacy
I tried to include everything, broad brush. I've treated codominia as
fuzzy borders, in the main. I've flagged the undefined borders in the
Caspian and South China seas, and noted what seem to be possible
borders in the future in the these areas.
> is everyones land accounted for in any way
Everyone's Land is manifest in those border segments labelled "sea";
its exclaves are marked "(sea)" with a note saying which exclave is
involved. So you can immediately pick out those countries that border
on Everyone's Land. If you like, you could do a search and replace
substituting "EVL" for "sea" - I thought about doing this in the
spreadsheet I mailed to you, but then forgot!
One last project I haven't got around to is to make a specific
ordered description of the border of Everyone's Land, to match the
border segments listed for every other country - the number of
bordering countries is too large to fit it easily into the same
format as the other countries.
> evidently you have treated the condo areas as simple borders
> tho not the trido area
> or why do you mention this
Carelessness. I was checking the maritime entries and it struck me
that a tripoint that had been effectively legislated out of existence
was worth commenting on. But for consistency I guess I ought also to
have mentioned DEFRLU, shouldn't I? Any others?
> but which really came first
> the borders or the multipoints
Like the egg and the chicken, you can't have one without the other.
(Unless, of course, the borders are all closed loops in some infinite
external country - but, like a world in which the chickens never get
to meet each other, that would be a pretty dull place to live.)
> (Can I
> > coin "polypoint", at least for the restricted purposes of this
> > posting, to mean "tri-point or higher"? I think you've already
> > used "multipoint" for other duties.)
> sure you can but there is no difference
> you may be thinking of the terms megapoint or maxipoint
I was. Scratch polypoint, keep multipoint.
> > If you're making a border tour
> ahh now i see the source of your problem
> linear rather than global thinking
> for the boundaries dont really move
> so your tour is already extra stuff
Ahh, no. Although I'm aware that I'm now entering the realms of
discussing the specific dance the angels are performing, I have to
disagree. For sure the boundaries don't move - the "border tour" was
just a way of illustrating the intrinsic vector nature of a border.
But the vector, the *handedness*, of borders is always there, by
virtue of having one thing on one side, and another thing on the
other side. That defines a direction in the same way that a left- or
right-threaded screw does, even if it's just lying in the box and not
being used to screw the inscrutable.
> you will do your strangest dance tho not at jungholz but at baarle
> where the point isnt marked on the ground but can only be
determined
> by visual alignments
> so you will have to stop short & shoot the markers by eye & then
> pivot & regain your head of steam in what would & could otherwise
> only be a perfectly fluid cruciform intersection
> & remember to mark the place or you will have to do it all over
again
> on the second pass
But surely this is a mere practicality? It shocks me to see you put
practicality in the way of idealistic endeavour.
> > as Bill says,
> > there's a different borders on the other side of the point -
> thats not what he said
> nor possibly even what he meant
Mr Pot apologises to Mr Kettle unreservedly. And to Bill. It's not
what he said at all. I was thinking of tripoints when I first read
his posting, and couldn't see what entities were involved in his
phrase "... in 'traversing' the point singularity, one would leave
behind one entity for another" unless these entities were the borders
themselves.
Grant