From: Philippe Verdy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Aug 23 2005 - 00:00:38 CDT
From: "Doug Ewell" <email@example.com>
>I have much more to say on this topic later, but this one can't wait.
> Philippe Verdy <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:
>> This is not the case of ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country codes commonly used
>> when designing locale codes. On the opposite, the UNSD numeric code,
>> and the ISO 3166-2 alpha-3 codes are much more stable.
> You cannot be serious:
> * ISO 3166-2 code elements are not necessarily alpha-3. Among many
> other countries, France and the U.S. do not use alpha-3 code elements.
I cannot resist to reply your (quite irrespective) remark!
Sorry, this was an evident minor (1-char) typo here. Of course I meant ISO
3166-1 alpha-3. I know that ISO 3166-2 refers to subdivisions of countries
(as I also said in the rest of the message, where I wanted to criticize the
way it is currently built).
And alpha-3 codes have their use also in France and US (where did you read
that they don't use them?) in many applications (less than alpha-2 codes,
but the "do not use" expression is wrong).
What I wanted to show is that, for countries and territories in ISO 3166-1,
alpha-3 codes and numeric codes are more reliable than alpha-2 commonly used
to build locale identifiers.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 23 2005 - 00:02:53 CDT