Unicode Emoji 11.0 characters now ready for adoption!
unicode at unicode.org
Mon Mar 5 09:42:15 CST 2018
here is reply to points one and two.
On 05.03.2018 16:57, Phake Nick via Unicode wrote:
> 在 2018年3月5日週一 13:25，Martin J. Dürst via Unicode
> <unicode at unicode.org > 寫道：
>> Hello John,
>> On 2018/03/01 12:31, via Unicode wrote:
>> > Pen, or brush and paper is much more flexible. With thousands of
>> > of people and places still not encoded I am not sure if I would
>> > hans (simplified Chinese characters) as well supported. nor with
>> > policy which limits China with over one billion people to
>> > less than 500 Chinese characters a year on average, and names not
>> > all to be added, it is hard to say which decade hans will be well
>> > supported.
>> I think this contains several misunderstandings. First, of course
>> pen/brush and paper are more flexible than character encoding, but
>> thats true for the Latin script, too.
> In latin script, as an example, I can simply name myself "Phake", but
> in Chinese with current Unicode-based environment, it would not be
> possible for me to randomly name myself using a character ⿰牜爲
> as I would like to.
>> Second, while I have heard that people create new characters for
>> a baby in a traditional Han context, I havent heard about this in a
>> simplified Han context. And its not frequent at all, the same way
>> naming a baby John in the US is way more frequent than lets say
>> Id also assume that China has regulations on what characters can be
>> used to name a baby, and that the parents in this age of smartphone
>> communication will think at least twice before giving their baby a
>> that they cannot send to their relatives via some chat app.
In most cases the answer to the above may well be the same, the
unencoded names of people and places are not new names, but rather names
of places and poeple in use from before Unicode and often before
computers. In IRG #48 People's Republic of China
that states of over 3,000 names of people and places are under
condideration for IRG working set 2017 and at least half require
encoding. The document also list other categories of CJK ideographs
under consideration for submission to Unicode.
>  mailto:unicode at unicode.org
More information about the Unicode