> Just say "choose location" and get over with it...
There has been at least one report that "location" (it has been used
in the past) may sound too vague.
My opinion has been that as long as we use iso-3166 the best is using
the wording of iso-3166 for designating the entries in the list.
> I say we should go for the short names on the maps... is _less_ likely
> to have any conflict with those.
I'm afraid you're just dreaming...:-)
Which maps? Chinese ones or Taiwanese ones? Greek ones or Macedonian
ones? I guess you got the point.
Some have suggested using the National Geographic maps. Though I'm a
monthly reader of the NG magazine, I think that they also may be
politically biased (NGM has recently shown some signs of political
orientations which have indeed hurted several of their non-US readers
as well as some US readers).
Finding an internationnaly recognised standard for these highly
sensitive topics such as country names is *very* difficult. Up to now,
I'm still convinced that the less bad list is iso-3166 (Denis Barbier
proposal is also the use of iso-3166 as ICU codes are officially
announced to use iso-3166).