JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
jefsey at jefsey.com
Sat Oct 22 20:31:01 CEST 2005
At 18:36 22/10/2005, John Clews wrote:
> > At 00:05 22/10/2005, Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
> >>You are probably right, but I think that ISO 3166-2 looks like the
> >>most promising spec to use for further qualifying a territory, eg to
> >> specify a dialect.
>"JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey at jefsey.com> replied:
> > May I ask you a silly question?
>Why don't you just read and understand the relevant standards, assess
>their strengths and limitations, and their suitability for different
>purposes, and then you dont' need to ask (or burden the list with) any
This is a very interesting comment indeed. I will certainly take
advantage from it.
But here the question is to know if it is suitable to systematically
use (normalisation) a limited standard to address a possibly
irrelevant need. Over History boarder lines have so many times been
disputed and changed. Obviously this is not the case for islands. But
there are places in the world where ISO 3166 referenced countries are
not islands. There also are islands divided by a boarder, like Haiti,
Saint Martin, etc. People have also migrated and invaded one another.
Since we speak of English: we may remember Caesar and William.
The main point however is that this thread shows the today difficulty
to reconciliate regional concepts, government names, globalisation
and the real life. The 92 registrations accepted by this mailing list
over a decade can rise questions, but also indicates this difficulty.
Just remember the basic Internet standardisation verification check:
does the considered solution scale? Is the name of the legal
authority over a territory an adequate or an artficial language
More information about the Ietf-languages