Variant subtags for non-ISO-15924 scripts (was Re: Variant subtag request: iso91995)

[Philip Newton]

On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org> wrote:
> Michael Everson <everson at evertype dot com> wrote:
>
>>>> Doug might propose a Ewellic script tag here, mightn't he?
>>>
>>> In fact no.  The assumption is that ISO 15924/RA can act in all such
>>> cases.
>>
>> The ISO 15924/RA might reject Ewellic.
>
> I would expect the RA to do so, and then I would have a few options:
>
> (a) request a variant subtag on this list (so "en-ewellic")
> (b) create a private-use subtag ("en-x-ewellic")
> (c) use a script subtag from the ISO 15924 private-use area ("en-Qabe")
>
> Whenever I tag Ewellic-script text, which isn't all that often, I go with
> option (c).  See also http://www.ewellic.org/conscript-15924.html .

Are (a) and (b) really options? I thought those were only for
varieties of a language.

...althought, if they can be used for transliteration schemes, I
suppose they could also be used for new scripts. I never thought about
it, I suppose.

So the take-away is: variant subtags and private-use subtags can also
represent scripts?

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <philip.newton at gmail.com>