Subject: Re: Enclaves/exclaves again<br/>
Date: Jan 17, 2003 @ 15:21<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 &lt;orc@orcoast.com&gt; (&quot;acroorca2002 &lt;orc@...&gt;&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="8675.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Next&emsp;[<a href="topic8489.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="8675.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="8677.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1342002404">haha<br/>
fortunately we are not trypointing for a headache tho<br/>
<br/>
& all these reflections are just a natural outgrowth of the desire <br/>
expressed by jan & felt by many for some sort of consensus & <br/>
clarity about what we all mean when referring to all the various <br/>
kinds of claves etc<br/>
<br/>
& you have already taken that process to the very end of the land<br/>
<br/>
& fortunately again <br/>
the most daunting part of the aqueous clave roundup has <br/>
already been completed by grant in his frags & perfs inventories<br/>
<br/>
so really there remains only the task of linking his typologies with <br/>
the scheme you have already also very well developed<br/>
allowing for the eventual addition of territorial seas claves on top <br/>
of his strictly eez based variety<br/>
then remembering not to forget an occasional clave anomaly <br/>
like the ile de la conference<br/>
& finally ransacking our collective memory for all the various <br/>
sorts of near claves & virtual claves & false claves & claves for a <br/>
day etc etc we can think of so at least they are all unmistakeably <br/>
acknowledged in the basic glossary<br/>
& voila the typology & dictionary at least are complete<br/>
even if the full inventories may take forever to be known <br/>
<br/>
& yes <br/>
that last part might prove to be a headache <br/>
but not our headache because not part of our present try<br/>
<br/>
in fact for some odd fellows it might even prove to be a delight<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
btw i believe i may have stumbled across some traces of the <br/>
prospective south american clave archipelago in messages <br/>
3277 3326 3328 & 3329<br/>
where you can read both the pros & the cons<br/>
tho the islands themselves have evidently been lost in an <br/>
expired link<br/>
<br/>
possibly they are the same as the 66 islands mentioned in<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.itaipu.gov.br/english/meio41.htm">http://www.itaipu.gov.br/english/meio41.htm</a><br/>
in which case they number 44 brazilians & 22 paraguayans<br/>
within the purported brpy condominial reservoir on the rio parana <br/>
called lake itaipu<br/>
<br/>
--- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, Rolf Palmberg <br/>
&lt;rpalmber@a...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; Your paragraph below accurately pinpoints<br/>
&gt; the potential headache.<br/>
&gt; Rolf<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt;anyway the problem of course is<br/>
&gt; &gt;once you admit lakes &or rivers<br/>
&gt; &gt;it is hard to stop admitting before reaching territorial seas<br/>
&gt; &gt;which must enclose quite a few so called coastal fragments <br/>
 </span></blockquote>too<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; &gt;& once you arrive there<br/>
&gt; &gt;well then you have all the other seas to allow or disallow as <br/>
 </span></blockquote>well<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; &gt;or at least to qualify their effects with descriptive <br/>
 </span></blockquote>nomenclature</div>