Request for variant subtags "scouse" and "boont"

Doug Ewell dewell at
Sat Sep 2 09:19:25 CEST 2006

I support both of these variant subtags requested by John Cowan.

The motivation for them, as John and Addison indicated, is to move the 
existing grandfathered tags "en-boont" and "en-scouse" into the realm of 
normal, composable tags.  The existing grandfathered tags would be moved 
to "redundant"; no needless and confusing duplicate tagging options 
would be created.  In fact, the only real change would be that these 
variants could now be used with other subtags in a generative manner:


I note John agreed to remove the Suppress-Script entries from his 
proposal forms, since they were obvious oversights and not allowable 
under the current rules.  I wonder, however, if we (LTRU) might have a 
need in the future to revise those rules and allow a Suppress-Script for 
a language-variant combination.  I don't have a real example, but close 
your eyes and pretend for a moment that we are faced with a dialect of 
Mongolian that warrants a variant on proper linguistic grounds, and 
coincidentally happens to be written overwhelmingly in Cyrillic script 
and virtually never in Mongolian script.  In that hypothetical case, it 
might be appropriate to consider that the language-variant combination 
"mn-whatever" should have a Suppress-Script of "Cyrl" even though "mn" 
by itself has none.  Just a thought.

Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA
Editor, draft-ietf-ltru-initial

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list