major thanx for this extra diligence mats
as it probably changes everything
& once again i find the pointing fun grows exponentially
while seeking the most punctilious truth
& particularly when it comes down to the last few inches
so first i wonder if the entire text of the treaty isnt available on line
as it might help further to review the full context
as well as for any other particulars there may be in it
& if not
or in the meantime
& assuming we have now gleaned all the pertinent data from it
& since it does indeed now appear to say flatly that the border is
defined by marker 110 rather than by the summit point itself
i think we have to take it at its word & be prepared to give up on
the summit point
even without ever having carefully examined it
& i was only keen on the exact summit because i imagined that
that is what you or someone said the treaty actually said
but now that we know it says marker 110 per se
& provided no other info is given elsewhere in it
all we need now is to figure out what marker 110 means
like does it include the iron bolt &or the big o for osterreich
or even still possibly by some reckoning the entire summit rock
yikes again
or does it only include the area enclosed by the tablet
& if only the latter
as seems most likely
then does the cross intersection within the marker indicate the
one & only true atde turn point on the peak
& thus the unique atdeatde crossing point
as also seems most likely
tho again not yet a certainty
curiously
based on what text i have seen
i still cant entirely rule out the possibility of there being more than
1 atde turn point on the peak
& if this were the case
then our prospective border cross itself might even vanish
either into a complete disconnection of big austria from jungholz
which would reduce jungholz to a true enclave exclave clave
rather than a peneclave clave anymore at all
or else into a narrow neck of continuous austria
which would in that case reduce jungholz to a mere proruption or
nonclave
no reason to get excited either way yet
but i think all the above probabilities are still on the table
yet perhaps most importantly
your original claim of a class a visit to the worlds only marked
border cross still stands undimished by any clear evidence to
the contrary
& that is enough closure for me to look forward to visiting just as
carefully the indirectly marked border cross in baarle next
& to dare to dream of reaching the unmarked piece de
resistance wetpoint border cross more distantly awaiting us in
bengal
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Stavro Blofeld
<blofeld_es@y...> wrote:
>
> --- "acroorca2002 <orc@o...>" <orc@o...>
> wrote:
>
> > & it all boils back down to a question of whether
> > the quadripoint
> > occurs somewhere within the marker 110 complex
> > as our eyes would like to believe
> > or at the very peak
> > as the original treaty evidently says
>
> > [cut] it would seem that [cut] the monumentation
> > must therefore simply be of the
> > indirect variety
>
> I have reexamined the text of the treaty if 1844, and
> there is room for another interpretation.
>
> The treaty describes the border, and says:
> "In gerader Linie (über 2 Untermarken) zum Mark im
> Felsen Nr. 110 (welches wegen Westen sieht) auf den
> höchsten Zinken des Steinberges."
>
> This translates to:
> "[From marker 109, the border follows] a straight
> line, via 2 intermediary markers, to marker 110, which
> is cut into the rock (looking west) on the highest
> peak of the Steinberg."
>
> I suppose one could interpret this as:
>
> "The border turns at the marking in the cliff.
> The mark constitutes border marker #110.
> And, by the way, if you'd like to go there, the mark
> is close to the highest peak of the Steinberg."
>
> The text above also specifically states that the
> marker is facing west ("welches wegen Westen sieht").
> A peak does not face in any direction except up, which
> would suggest that the peak is not the turning point.
>
> We have at least three quadripoint candidates:
>
> 1. The top of the "110-rock"
> 2. The black cross.
> 3. The eyepin (iron bolt)
>
> The interpretation above suggests that the top of the
> rock would be a little less likely, but gives no hint
> as to what actually constitutes the "Mark im Felsen"
> (marking in the rock).
>
> M
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com