ISO 3166 and RFC 3066bis

[Doug Ewell]

John Cowan <jcowan at reutershealth dot com> wrote:

>>> Exceptionally reserved code elements (AC Ascension Island, CP
>>> Clipperton Island, DG Diego Garcia, EA Ceuta and Melilla, EU the
>>> European Union, FX metropolitan France, GG Guernsey, IC Canary
>>> Islands, IM Isle of Man, JE Jersey, TA Tristan da Cunha, UK United
>>> Kingdom) don't have clear status in RFC 3066bis (or any
>>> predecessor).
>>
>> Of these, only FX is valid in RFC 3066bis, because it was once a real
>> ISO 3166-1 code before being removed in 1997.  AFAIK, the rest are
>> not valid, but as John said, perhaps some should be.
>
> I think UK should be a non-canonical synonym for GB, and the others
> should be allowed, with the possible exception of EU (but it does no
> harm, and handling them all uniformly seems better).

[...]

> So my proposals are:
>
> 1) Allow the exceptionally reserved code elements of ISO 3166-1 on
> equal footing with the assigned code elements.
>
> 2) Make the exceptionally reserved code element "UK" a non-canonical
> synonym for the assigned code element "GB".

I've updated my registry to include commented-out entries for these
regions.  When there has been some discussion of them, they can be
activated or deleted as appropriate.

I think DG (Diego Garcia) should be an alias for IO (British Indian
Ocean Territory), GG (Guernsey) and JE (Jersey) should be aliases for
830 (Channel Islands), and IM should be an alias for 833 (both Isle of
Man).  Of course, UK would be an alias for GB, as John said.

I also think a case could be made that these should *not* be added, in
case ISO 3166/MA decides to reuse them for some reason and we have to
fall back on a UN code or variant subtag.  They shouldn't be recycling
assigned codes, but one could argue that the reserved codes are theirs
to do with what they please.  As Addison pointed out, "subtags
originally excluded or overlooked can be added to the registry later."

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California
 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/