CE Whitehead cewcathar at
Fri Aug 1 17:15:55 CEST 2008

Hi, I am not sure that the purpose of my email was to describe the correct use of suppress script but rather was to say that I felt zh-Latn was probably the best prefix as suppress-script (correct me if I am wrong) could not be used with a variant subtag to indicate the script.   
I still support zh-Latn as the prefix; I agree with Addison that multiple prefixes are possible, and I am not wholly against allowing multiple--it adds nothing to the distinction between the two Romanizations to say that the prefix is zh-Latn as the prefix for both is zh-Latn.
Alas, however, I think Frank is right; these two variants were previously identified I suppose as zh-Latn  (is that right?  I do not tag Chinese . . . ), so zh-Latn is probably the obvious prefix--there are in fact some other Romanizations that I really know nothing about but on checking know exist (see
 --C. E. Whitehead> From: "Doug Ewell" doug at > > The solution would be to use suppress-script except that that is used > > only for language subtags, not for variant subtags.> >> > A suppress-script for the language part of the tag, zh , that would > > work here--because Latin is clearly not the default script for zh.> > This is not an accurate depiction of the purpose or use of > Suppress-Script. Oops. I thought suppress-script was used for the most commonly used script on the internet--so that that script subtag could optionally be omitted from the tag and still understood to be the script. That's what I meant by 'default script.' If I am wrong, my mistake.
Maybe my use of the words 'default script' was incorrect (I made the term up myself). --C. E. Whiteheadcewcathar at 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list