Re: A General Resolution? [was: Standard Compliance in Country Names]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <leader@debian.org> wrote:
> I unfortunately missed Christian on Friday by a few hours, but I will
> comment on the draft he sent to me and make sure it's ready when he
> returns from his holidays.
I can guess what kind of response you would get if you ask about how
they settled on the name "Taiwan, Province of China": this particular
question is addressed in the ISO 3166 FAQ (and also see my other post in
the thread that details the negotiation between the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs in Taiwan and the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency). Not that I am
against asking them again, though.
A more interesting question would be asking them if they consider the
country names listed in ISO 3166 also part of the standard. If they
respond that the country names are only used to make it clear to which
country/region/whatever each of the alpha-2 codes refer, then the
original standard compliance bug Christian bug filed is bogus, and we
naturally revert to the original status quo of calling Taiwan Taiwan.
If they respond that the country names are also part of the standard and
changing them violates ISO 3166, they should offer an explanation on how
ISO (or UN for that matter) could act as an authoritative source of
country names given that: (1) the names do not originate from either ISO
or UN, and (2) countries decide their own names without seeking (or
needing) permission from ISO or UN. In other words, they need to come
up with a reasonable explanation on when and how did international
organizations (ISO or UN) get into the business of naming countries.
Regards,
- --
Chuan-kai Lin
http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~linchuan/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkCFipwACgkQqq7AEt0PYmhvTgCg2/6yy/aopkAbtOm/oK11HEzT
9WsAoKrmAEbwMJj8VTTiiMv4+lTo3+Wr
=f1nV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: