[db-wg] country codes in the RIPE Database (was: ORGANISATION country code)

On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 at 07:18, denis walker <ripedenis at gmail.com> wrote:

[...]

> This is exactly what I said. In the quoted para above I said "the
> country codes have a well defined meaning", which you agree with. Then
> I said "but when entered by users no one knows what it's purpose is.".
> Another way of saying no one knows their meaning in the context of the
> database, which you also agree with.
>
> >
> > But even if we started to define a meaning at this late stage, who
> > would choose to use it?
>
> In the case of the ORGANISATION object it would be at this 'early'
> stage. Which I think would be a bad idea. For the INET(6)NUM objects I
> agree it is at a late stage. But for the last 20 years many people
> have assumed the country codes relate to geolocation and used the data
> in that way. If we define it to mean that now, and make it optional,
> we are aligning reality with what so many people already believe. With
> clear explanations sent to all resource holders and/or maintainers of
> the resource objects, I think we could get this message out there.

Setting semantics aside... I don't know whether changing definitions —
and adding a missing definition is a de facto change — would improve
things or make them worse. What research do we have to support the
position that it would be an improvement?

Kind regards,

Leo