[Pkg-isocodes-devel] iso_3166_2.xml US Armed Forces states

[Kamal Mostafa]

Hi Alexis-

I agree that if these codes are not actually specified by ISO-3166-2, 
they just don't belong in the file.

Note that if you were to remove all three of the blocks you mentioned, 
there would be no remaining <geographical_regeion> elements left in the 
file at all!    Does <geographical_region> even need to remain in the DTD?

 -Kamal


Alexis Darrasse wrote:
> Hello,
>
> my reply concerns both of your messages and the <geographical_region>
> element in general. It is currently used in three cases:
>
> CU: The provinces are actually listed twice, once with
>     <iso_3166_2_entry> and their ISO code and once with <region> and
>     their postal code.
>
> GB: <geographical_region> contains "official abbreviations" of county
>     names, which according to statoids.com are "conventional
>     abbreviations".
>
> US: There are three postal codes relative to the US armed forces that
>     were included with the states ISO codes. As they are not ISO codes I
>     moved them in a <geographical_region> for the time being.
>
> So, in all three cases these are codes coming from the postal system,
> not ISO. Since the file states in its header that "This file gives a
> list of all country subdivisions in the ISO 3166-2", my opinion is that
> we should remove these entries. There might be however a very good
> reason for keeping them that I am not aware of, so I will wait for
> comments before removing them or fixing the issues you pointed.
>
> Alexis
>
>
>