- From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:52:05 +0100
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:50:04 +0100, Wrigley, Ave <ave.wrigley at itn.co.uk> wrote: > > Do you really want to put vendors into the position of > > deciding just what to call the Malvinas Islands? Or exactly > > the status of palestine or the Gaza Strip. > > No ... that is why it is specified as an ISO 3166. It should be a > requirement for browsers to be compliant to this standard. but I don't think this standard is all that common, in the UK for example, you nearly always get GB split up. > > I don't really think this could be specified to be truly useful, and > > most people will end up writing their own list anyway. > > If people are not happy with ISO 3166, then they can write their own > list (as they do now!). My argument is that the vast majority case will be people writing their own, therefore we shouldn't special case the ISO-3166 case, placing implementation and maintenance burdens on vendors (what happens when said vendor goes bankrupt?) [the detailed proposals don't degrade, so need to be voided straight off, unfortunately] Cheers,
Received on Monday, 19 July 2004 04:52:05 UTC