[Fwd]: Response to Mark's message]

[Martin Duerst]

At 23:46 03/04/09 +0100, Michael Everson wrote:

>Remember, the *script* is Hani. We would be encoding TWO script variants 
>in 15924. Now that in itself is unusual. Compare Latn/Latg/Latf. The thing 
>is that Latn is still used by itself, but if we have Hant/Hans then what 
>function will Hani have?

I could imagine jp-Hani to be used for current-day Japanese, as
opposed to jp-Latn (romanized Japanese) or jp-Hant (Japanese before
the writing reform after WWII). I don't think jp-Hans would be
appropriate for current-day Japanese, because there are quite
some differences between the Japanese and the Chinese simplifications,
and Japanese simplifications don't go as far as the Chinese ones.

Regards,   Martin.