Use of "CS" for 'Serbia and Montenegro'

[Bruce Lilly]

>  Date: 2005-01-12 00:35
>  From: "Peter Constable" <petercon at microsoft.com>

> I don't. I assume that a parser needs to work when it's not connected to
> the net

Yes, but it's a minor distinction that a parser may use
a table or other internal structure based on a snapshot
of code definitions.

> and I don't assume that parsers need to have a clue what the 
> string means. 

Validating parsers at least need to be able to distinguish
valid codes from other two- and three-letter sequences.
 
> I do assume, however, that at some point users have a part in assigning
> tags to particular content, that at some point developers will associate
> certain known-valid tags with particular UI strings. And in those
> situations, having this tag registered can and would serve to clarify
> what this particular tag is and is not intended to be used for.

I still don't follow your reasoning. [I'll ignore the "sr" code,
since that's not an issue.]  There is already a definition of
"CS" meaning "SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO" (or, if you prefer,
"SERBIE-ET-MONTÉNÉGRO") in the public and readily-accessible
ISO 3166 list.  Under precisely what circumstances would a UI
be developed where it would not have definitions of codes
corresponding to a moderately recent ISO 3166 list, but
*would* have access to an IANA registry definition which does
not yet exist?  In other words, precisely how would an
after-the-fact affirmation of a fraction of the ISO 3166
definition make any difference?  Conversely, if IANA
introduces a typographical error in the IANA registry
version -- and that is not a mere hypothetical situation,
IANA has done precisely that in some areas, as I have
previously pointed out -- would that not *add* confusion?