>>>>It is both a valid state and a valid country as far as the UT context is concerned.
>>>>
>>>>>It veered off because Puerto Rico being a state was asserted to be valid. But never mind....
>>>
>>>You can not have both, so Michel should make a pick.
>>
>>Ok, I'll bite. Why can't Michel have both?
>
>For unification and for statistical information. I, personally, when I have a moment, try to standardize the data as much as I can. All the misspelled cities get corrected / mapped to one uniform spelling, cities from the wrong countries get re-pointed, etc.
>
>Say, we may have Agra in CA, USA instead of India, etc. These types of problems. Even though there is no chance to get the addresses correctly standardized - it's a lost cause.

Sure, but again, it all depends on the implementation. If he doesn't need to worry about statistical information then there isn't a problem.

It's why I said a while back that if he is going to use his provinces table to tell him there are 52 states, then he has a problem, but if he's not using it that way, then what difference does it make.

I agree that standardization is best, but in Michel's case, it might actually create more of a headache than it solves.