>
>Thanks for the constructive response < g >

It's easy to be constructive. :)

>These are my thoughts as well. Of course, it's hard to implement, however, Michel introduced an ability to map city names. E.g. for common names we may have a cross-table of mappings. Also, I think, some validations should be put on. Say, the city name should be in the proper case and rarely can contain numbers (in fact, I don't know the city name containing numbers, but may be you know some examples).

Murmansk-26? :)

>Also it would be good to agree on some standards, like Ft for Fort or St for Saint, etc.

What if Ft or St has some other meanning in some language. :)