On Mon 02 Jul 2012 19:28 +1200, Jason Ryan wrote: > On 02/07/12 at 07:20am, Zero Cho wrote: > > > > Thanks for your support. You're right. This is not intended to be a > > political debate, so I have been using a neutral word, Taiwan, rather than > > other more official but sensitive, less common name. It's the fact that ISO > > is not reflecting how most of the world see it. ISO does not have authority > > over the country name. ISO does not obligate to reflect how world sees > > things too. I'm not asking for special treatments. I'm just asking you to > > follow the convention created from previous experience to prevent the > > misunderstanding and debates. > > As the ISO page clearly states, the country names are sourced from the United > Nations: > > “The country names in ISO 3166 come from United Nations sources. New names and > codes are added automatically when the United Nations publishes new names in > either the Terminology Bulletin Country Names or in the Country and Region Codes > for Statistical Use maintained by the United Nations Statistics Divisions.” > http://www.iso.org/iso/country_codes/country_codes > > Asking Arch to modify the standard *is* a political act. The whole point of > using a standard for what is an extremely fraught topic (geography and naming > conventions) is to avoid these sorts of issues. > > If you have an alternative standard that can be used, please suggest it. An alternative has already been suggested. There's no reason we need to keep coming back to ISO/UN. I'm not sure what the issue is anymore and why this can't be fixed. This is silly. At any rate someone should write to whoever maintains django-countries and have them fix things on their end. These things could have been mentioned from the very get-go in the original bug report in discussion instead of closing the report with zero discussion. Incidentally the forum post is now closed and hidden from the public. Great work.
