At 2004-04-05T16:18:47Z, John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> writes: > "Taiwan, Republic of China" is a political statement that you don't > recognize China's claim. I don't follow the Taiwan situation that closely, but don't you mean it the other way around? > "Taiwan" is neutral. Failure to parrot the Chinese government's political > statement is not opposing it: it's ignoring it. Same thing. > Why does "official" matter? "Taiwan" is unambiguous and universally > understood. OK, then I vote that we replace "United States of America" with "America". It's also universally understood. You have to pick a name from somewhere, and Debian adopted the ISO list of country names. Either use it, or don't, but Debian should *not* just randomly pick the entries that it will use and replace the others at a whim for purely political reasons. And yes, choosing to disregard an established standard because you disagree with the politics of how it was established *is* a political decision. > That standards organization is a political organization which has assigned > that name for a political purpose. Debian need not further that purpose. Which standards organization would you accept as authoritative, then? Surely Debian isn't in the business of defining its own set of standards, is it? > The other names are reasonable. I'm sure that at least a few people would disagree. -- Kirk Strauser In Googlis non est, ergo non est.
Attachment:
pgpKn44ymwQGI.pgp
Description: PGP signature