CRM-19993 Fixes for ISO compliance with countries and counties

Hey John. Thanks for raising this set of issues. I think it would be a little less unwieldy to open just one issue for updates to regional data.

Note that CiviCRM follows the ISO convention for country & state names and has no opinion otherwise. So if we can just grab the latest data from them and plug it in, that would be ideal.

Yeh, thanks Coleman. I don't think I'll be able to do a few comparison, but I'm hoping to pick up a few errors in the data. I'll re-purpose this as a catch-all.

You know what would be really cool? A CI script or maybe a unit test that checks conformance with the ISO standard (or, while we're dreaming, a bot that automatically submits a pull-request whenever there are changes to the standard).

Agree that a test/check would be cool =]

I've updated the description with the changes I'll put into a PR - it's not going to be a definitive 'matchup' between the ISO and Civi, but it should bring things better in line.

This work comes out of some matching we've been doing with the county list in another database. All I can say is I wish everyone conformed to the same standard - hooray for ISOs

also pushed a fix for a typo in British Virgin Islands

I think we wanted the countries to move from ISO 3166-1 to a much more widely used standard https://issues.civicrm.org/jira/browse/CRM-19996, although the interoperability would mean we should continue to use ISO 3166 for subnational state/province info. Unless we find a different standard that is more widely used in software.

Hi Joe, I saw that issue. Whilst that is still 'in the works' I hope this patch will be reviewed.

Changing the standard country / state list could have a big impact on organisations (particularly where syncs to other systems are involved). But I'm happy to discuss that as part of CRM-19996.