Emoji end goal

Rebecca T 637275 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 12 13:45:00 CDT 2016

Agreed. I think a good response to “that’d _double_ the codepoints, so we
should just add a ligature” is “if it would be such a burden to implement
that you don’t want to use space in the charts for what are, fundamentally,
hundreds of *semantically different* ideographs, why are we dumping that
burden onto vendors?”

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p at wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> I think that emojis at the minimum shoudl all be dispalyable isolately,
> without being required to form pseudo ligatures or to use colors. Skin
> colors can still be displayed with a patchwork-like rectangle after it and
> could still use monochromaic pattern fills. The number of combinations is
> exploding and most of them are infact not evident at all (or are highly
> culturally oriented).
> Amojis should remain simple, showing basic shapes, but I don't see why it
> could not differentiate a man or a woman, independantly of the ligatures
> that may be created with them (using a completely invented adhoc
> "orthography" that actually follows no standard at all and does not match
> cultural differences or the way we perceive the associations, that are more
> and more limiting their semantic interpretation in a too much restricted
> way.
> We certaionly don't have enough history is using emojis for creating and
> standardizing such pseudo-orthography. Emojis remain a new pseudo-language,
> but it reuses a typography based on visible symbols that have a long
> cutlural tradition with other cultural meanings and many unexpected
> semantics that don't work with the current associations created.
> So in fact I only support very few associations:
> - associating two "Flag" pseudo-letters (but a rendering should still be
> OK if the emojis just show the actual letters within a left or right part
> of a frame for a flag., without attempting to combine them into an actual
> colored flag (which will need to evolve with time).
> - associating skin color emojis after an emoji for a real human person or
> perosn face (no need this in fiction characters or for coloring other parts
> such as hands, fingers, eyes, hair, nose...)
> In all cases, colors should always remain an option. Please keep emojis
> simple and always usable in isolation, leaving their interpretation and
> associations only to reading humans according to their local culture and
> social interactions. The way they are used now is in fact abusing the
> initial goal of Unicode encoding which is to not encode according to
> specific languages or culture, and not break their basic semantic. byt
> mising them into something that is not clearly separable and does not carry
> the same amount of semantics.
> 2016-10-12 18:31 GMT+02:00 Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org>:
>> Leonardo Boiko wrote:
>> <http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2016-m10/0192.html>
>> Gosh, even I wouldn't have gone that far.
>> --
>> Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20161012/b06f8586/attachment.html>

More information about the Unicode mailing list