Although the requester of this subtag (later redesignated as [fr-ortograf], finally decided to abandon his proposal, I wonder why this particular subtag did not meet use criteria and [neu] did. I do agree: it really does not do "special needs" people that much good to learn to read an obscure orthography -- though I think it's o.k. to let them write in one if they are more comfortable -- or else they can use "invented spelling" till they get a chance to check the spelling of what they write; but phonetic spelling is an orthography whose time has come. (And "special needs" people might of course try learning a phonetic spelling system that makes use of special characters too, Ewellics.) Maybe of course someday someone will come up with a special spelling for Canadian French (would that help "elevate" reading scores of students in French schools in Canada (which are lower than reading scores in English language schools)? Would it instill pride? Who knows? But it would get used I am sure. I would hope those students would still learn standard French, so that Quebec keeps French alive (it won't keep a special dialect alive so easily).

I think on the other hand -- can a meta content extension be gotten for transliteration and translation information? -- in my opinion these are needed. Of course variant subtags to indicate the source language of transcriptions can be sought too. I could use a meta content tag for my translation here. (I could create one but it would not get wide acceptance; so actually this is something the librarians would need to do.)

<meta name="translation"  lang="" title="" author="" ed="" locurl=""  loc="" />
<!-- these are all for indicating source info . . . any field can be null here; the url can be null, the author can be null, the location null, not sure when the title would ever be null but it might; the loc might be somewhere inside a book as would be the case for a chapter, or might be in an archive or library or null of course; "loc" looks like "library of congress" but I could not come up with a better term;
"ed" means edition or version and again I'm not sure if ed is the right term; 
might also want to include a date I don't know why some fields could not be omitted entirely -->
<meta name="transliteration" lang="" title="" author="" ed="" date="" locurl="" loc="" />
<meta name="transcription" />