On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 10:59:45AM -0400, random832@fastmail.us wrote:
On Wed, May 8, 2013, at 8:23, Marc Lehmann wrote:
The regions are _absolutely_ defined by political boundaries. It's why
That is your _goal_, yes, but where does it say so?
in the Theory file. "Include at least one location per time zone rule set per country."
In context, that seems to mean what I said, yes... The point is that that absolute definition is your goal, and not written down in the Theory file, ignoring out-of-context quoting (general rules vs. absolute definitions, and this not being applicable to the case in question).
You've been avoiding the word "country" for some reason, and I've gone along with it, but it's certainly in the documentation.
What the heck, I am not avoiding anything. I *replied* to a mail that used that term:
From: David Patte ₯ <dpatte@relativedata.com> Message-ID: <518942F6.4030302@relativedata.com>
that A) the database explicitly identifies what political boundary each
And he didn't even *mention* the word country in the part I replied to. Are you attempting to single-sidedly change the topic of this subthread and then accuse others of not using your terms or what?
Whether a city is in a country is certainly a question of political boundaries, and I can't imagine what kind of mental contortions you would have to go through to justify claiming otherwise.
I am obviously not justifying anything you claim. Please get your facts and claims right. In any case, I will not comment further on this topic, as exchanging accusations isn't leading anywhere. -- The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG -----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net ----==-- _ generation ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@schmorp.de -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\