Author Topic: MEX-DF: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?  (Read 7134 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline neroute2

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 976
  • Last Login:Today at 01:57:37 am
Re: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?
« Reply #15 on: November 17, 2019, 04:00:28 pm »
Are you aware of any other countries that prominently use abbreviations on their subnational routes?
Spain for their autonomous community routes (as michih should know!)
That's pretty horrible. In what universe is this CB-170?

Edit: I see, the route name is still CA170. Changing still seems like additional confusion with no benefit. Someone traveling these roads is likely not going to know the ISO abbreviation, unless they've looked it up.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2019, 04:04:39 pm by neroute2 »

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Last Login:Today at 07:32:16 am
Re: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?
« Reply #16 on: November 17, 2019, 04:20:36 pm »
Changing still seems like additional confusion with no benefit.
Likewise with the DF -> CDMX change, surely?

My point is that we don't necessarily match subdivision abbrevations with subdivision-derived prefixes.

Offline neroute2

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 976
  • Last Login:Today at 01:57:37 am
Re: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?
« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2019, 04:56:53 pm »
Changing still seems like additional confusion with no benefit.
Likewise with the DF -> CDMX change, surely?
That's an actual change of name of the subdivision. There no longer is a DF.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4555
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 04:04:16 pm
Re: MEX-DF: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?
« Reply #18 on: October 31, 2023, 01:06:19 pm »
I still think that we should change it. I still volunteer to update the files in the HB repo.

I don't remember where but we discussed the Mexican region names anywhere. We usually go with ISO 3166: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:MX

Please don't jump the gun with changing, we should discussed first. I'm in favor of changing it to ISO names when the whole revision of active Mexican systems is done - on activation of the new systems.

15 out of 32 codes had to be changed (marked with '-->'). In addition one region name:

Code: [Select]
MEX;Mexico;MEX;NA;Country
MEX-AGS --> MEX-AGU;Aguascalientes;MEX;NA;State
MEX-BC --> MEX-BCN;Baja California;MEX;NA;State
MEX-BCS;Baja California Sur;MEX;NA;State
MEX-CAM;Campeche;MEX;NA;State
MEX-CHIH --> MEX-CHH;Chihuahua;MEX;NA;State
MEX-CHIS --> MEX-CHP;Chiapas;MEX;NA;State
MEX-COAH --> MEX-COA;Coahuila;MEX;NA;State
MEX-COL;Colima;MEX;NA;State
MEX-DF --> MEX-MEX;Distrito Federal;MEX;NA;Federal District
MEX-DGO --> MEX-DUR;Durango;MEX;NA;State
MEX-EMEX --> MEX-CMX;Estado de Mexico --> Ciudad de Mexico;MEX;NA;State
MEX-GRO;Guerrero;MEX;NA;State
MEX-GTO --> MEX-GUA;Guanajuato;MEX;NA;State
MEX-HGO --> MEX-HID;Hidalgo;MEX;NA;State
MEX-JAL;Jalisco;MEX;NA;State
MEX-MICH --> MEX-MIC;Michoacán;MEX;NA;State
MEX-MOR;Morelos;MEX;NA;State
MEX-NAY;Nayarit;MEX;NA;State
MEX-NL --> MEX-NLE;Nuevo León;MEX;NA;State
MEX-OAX;Oaxaca;MEX;NA;State
MEX-PUE;Puebla;MEX;NA;State
MEX-QRO --> MEX-QUE;Queretaro;MEX;NA;State
MEX-QROO --> MEX-ROO;Quintana Roo;MEX;NA;State
MEX-SIN;Sinaloa;MEX;NA;State
MEX-SLP;San Luis Potosí;MEX;NA;State
MEX-SON;Sonora;MEX;NA;State
MEX-TAB;Tabasco;MEX;NA;State
MEX-TAM;Tamaulipas;MEX;NA;State
MEX-TLAX --> MEX-TLA;Tlaxcala;MEX;NA;State
MEX-VER;Veracruz;MEX;NA;State
MEX-YUC;Yucatán;MEX;NA;State
MEX-ZAC;Zacatecas;MEX;NA;State