suppress-script values for fil, mi, pes, prs, qu members

[John Cowan]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com> wrote:

> If there isn't a script issue, then indeed language tags without
> script subtags should be completely reasonable. But how is an
> implementer to know when that's the case?

By knowing something about the language.  Localizing into a language
about which you know nothing is always going to be a mistake.  It's
the same problem as language tagging proper: you can't tag something
unless you already know what language and script it is in.  If you
know anything about Cusco Quechua, you know that it's written in Latin
script.  (Of course, you can use vague tags like und-Cyrl, but those
don't make sense as locale names.)

>> Languages with 639-1 codes are a different matter, because they were
>> valid before RFC 4646,
>
> As were 639-2 codes

Yes.  For 639-1 read 639-2 in my message.