Emoji end goal

Charlotte Buff irgendeinbenutzername at gmail.com
Wed Oct 12 15:40:20 CDT 2016

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:14:31 +0000 David Starner <prosfilaes_at_gmail.com
<prosfilaes_at_gmail.com?Subject=Re:%20Emoji%20end%20goal>> wrote:
> Because the vendors want it.

I wouldn't say so in general. Emoji fonts are far more work than regular
black-and-white vectors and I honestly believe that vendors with PNG-based
fonts like Apple and Google are slowly reaching the point where they can no
longer reasonably support any more emoji because their font sizes would
just blow up. I have noticed that recently vendors have become quite picky
on what emoji they want to support, going so far as blocking the addition
of new symbol characters to the UCS entirely, rather than just refusing to
give them emoji presentation once added. (Why they still thought the
hundreds of new gendered emoji were a good idea is another question.)

It's not like back in Unicode 7 when Apple and friends happily added half
of Webdings to their colorful emoji fonts for no apparent reason. I think
vendors really don't want to spend their time and effort on emoji anymore.
Things like hair colors are pretty much unfeasible for anyone besides
Microsoft, but as soon as there is some kind of semi-official Unicode
mechanism for that, user will *demand* you to follow through and implement
all possible variants.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20161012/c84a5993/attachment.html>

More information about the Unicode mailing list