--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: [...] > > *far* away from any > > artificial terraforming they might be implying was > > done to reclaim land from the sea. > > Not the point, of course. It isn't just a matter of > land reclamation from the sea; most of the country > has been affected in one way or another by the various > measures that have been taken to protect the land from > flooding, not just from the sea but from the rivers, > including the Meuse, going back many centuries.
Actually, I DID think it was having to do with the sea, but as you say, the rivers are a major issue. My online browsing last night found that while Limbur is the most hilly area in the Netherlands, and has the highest "peak" at 300+ meters, there's a strip of land along the western border that is VERY prone to flooding. The capital of Limburg, Maastricht, was severely flooded some years back. It made international headlines. You can find sateline phtos of the area during the flood. Vlodrop is actually north of the hilly area, and while its not near any major arteries, the entire area is a flood basin called the "Maas basin." in fact; and the Germans weren't living there because it was so watery. The Dutch drained almost the entire area along the German-Netherlands border and made it liveable. This is supposed to be the reason why there's never been any major border disputes between the Netherlands and Germany. The attitude has apparently been: if the crazy Dutch want to live there, let 'em! > Lawson > > declares that Apple invented MPEG-4. Both seem to > > believe that an area on the inland side of Holland > > had no original natural features, and was reclaimed > > from the sea. > > Again speaking of credibility, neither Lawson nor I > suggested such a thing. Nor did I say that Apple created MPEG-4. However, the QUickTIme file format won over whatever Microsoft was proposing in 1998. As I said, without Apple, MPEG-4 would be different. > > > To paraphrase the old anti-drug commercial, "This is > > your mind on TM." > > Actually it's Barry's mind cooking in his endless > fantasies. About time to stick a fork in it. > This whole thing with MPEG-4 and with the flood-prone Netherlands is FFL in a nutshell, I think. I mean, everyone makes mistakes, and my assumption about WHY that part of Holland was "unnatural" turns out to be wrong, but the essential point turned out to be correct, even by accident, but Barry and friends feel the need to score points on the issue, so rather than fact-checking, they just pile on. Likewise with MPEG-4's file format. I said it was based on the QuickTime format, which it was. It's been modified extensively since then, but in fact, the core philosophy of the MPEG-4 format hasn't changed that much from QuickTIme's, as far as I know. Checking... Yep, here's what the US government says about the MPEG-4 file format: http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/fdd/fdd000155.shtml#sign General The four file formats associated with the ISO/IEC 14496 family of specifications are: MP4_FF_1, "version 1" from Part 1 (2001) MP4_FF_2, "version 2," this document, from Part 14 MP4_FF_AVCE, for Advanced Video Coding extensions, from Part 15 MP4_XMT, "textual format" from Part 11 Version 2 is very similar to its predecessor MP4_FF_1 as both owe a debt to the QuickTime file format that preceded them. This lineage is shared with the supertype for MP4_FF_2, ISO_BMFF, defined in Parts 12 of both the MPEG-4 and JPEG 2000 standards. Note that "object-oriented building blocks" are called boxes in this file format and its parent, ISO_BMFF; in contrast, they are called atoms in the predecessor MP4_FF_1 and QuickTime.
