More scripts, not more emoji (Re: Accessibility Emoji)

[Markus Scherer via Unicode]

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:

> We need to get more scripts into Unicode, not more emoji.
>
> That is — somewhat inflated — the core message of a NYT article published
> six months ago,
> and never shared here (no more than so many articles about Unicode,
> scripts, and emoji).
> Some 100 scripts are missing in the Standard, affecting as many as 400
> million people worldwide.
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/magazine/how-the-appetite-for-emojis-
> complicates-the-effort-to-standardize-the-worlds-alphabets.html


You are right. One good way that you can help make it happen is to support
the Script Encoding Initiative which is mentioned in the article.

Some of the AAC money goes there. And since the most popular adopted
characters <http://www.unicode.org/consortium/adopted-characters.html> are
emoji, their popularity is helping close the gap that you pointed out.

They have also helped in other ways -- they really motivated developers to
make their code work for supplementary code points, grapheme cluster
boundaries, font ligatures, spurred development of color font technology,
and got organizations to update to newer versions of Unicode faster than
before. Several of these things are especially useful for recently added
scripts.

Best regards,
markus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180414/6049e4a6/attachment.html>