Vendor-assigned emoji (was: Encoding italic) via Unicode unicode at
Wed Feb 13 13:05:16 CST 2019

James Kass wrote:

> Nobody disagreed and I think it’s a splendid suggestion.  If anyone is 
> discussing drafting a proposal to accomplish this, please include me 
> in the “cc”.

I too would like to receive copies of any discussions please.

In relation to the proposal, I opine that the facility should not allow 
a glyph that has been assigned to be changed at a later date.

Given that discussion is about a whole plane of code points being 
assigned, then even if the code points are assigned at fifty every month 
that would take over one hundred years to fill a whole plane. Certainly 
early months might have more than fifty allocations.

It is important to have stability as otherwise archived messages could 
have their meaning retrospectively changed with no easy way to find out 
the original meaning.

William Overington
Tuesday 12 February 2019

More information about the Unicode mailing list