On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:11 AM, Ken Whistler <kenwhist...@att.net> wrote:
> for the full context, and for the current 26x26 letter matrix which is > the basis for the flag glyph implementations of regional indicator > code pairs on smartphones. > > SC, SO, ST are already taken, but might I suggest putting in for > registering > "AB" for Alba? That one is currently unassigned. > > Yeah, yeah, what is the likelihood of BSI pushing for a Scots two-letter > code?! But seriously, if folks are planning ahead for Scots independence > or even some kind of greater autonomy, this is an issue that needs to > be worked, anyway. > > In the meantime, let me reiterate that there is *no* formal relationship > between TLD's and the regional indicator codes in Unicode (or the > implementations > built upon them). Well, yes, a bunch of registered TLD's do match the > country > codes, but there is no two-letter constraint on TLD's. This should already > be apparent, as Scotland has registered ".scot" At this point there isn't > even > a limitation of TLD's to ASCII letters, so there is no way to map them > to the limited set of regional indicator codes in the Unicode Standard. > > Not having a two letter country code for Scotland that matches the > four letter TLD for Scotland might indeed be a problem for someone, > but I don't see *this* as a problem that the Unicode Standard needs > to solve. > I want to add to that that there are already a fair number of ISO 2-letter codes for regions that are administered as part of another country, like Hong Kong. There are also codes for crown possessions like Guernsey. So having a code for Scotland (and Wales, and N. Ireland) do not really break precedent. But as Ken says, the best mechanism is for the UK to push for a code in ISO and the UN. Mark <https://google.com/+MarkDavis> *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
_______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode@unicode.org http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
