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

[Doug Ewell]

Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft dot com> wrote:

> Well, the door has always been open for people to propose additional 
> s-s info. I'm not really worried that someone will come along 
> proposing thousands of additions because there are just too many 
> languages for which it's too hard to find info. I could imagine this 
> leading over some time to dozens or maybe one- or two-hundred more 
> cases that are assumed to be clear mono-script cases. And I'm not 
> concerned that would be onerous were it to happen.

Well, we've already had cases in the past where requests to add S-S to 
existing subtags were either rejected or caused lengthy debate on 
philosophical grounds.

> Of course, we could also decide up front that we want to take some 
> entirely different approach. That's why I opened general discussion 
> rather than going directly to submitting forms.

And I do appreciate your taking that approach.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s ­