New Public Review on QID emoji

Tue Nov 12 09:54:34 CST 2019

WJGO  >>Yet if QID emoji are implemented by Unicode Inc. without also 
being implemented by ISO/IEC 10646 then that could lead to future 
problems, ...

Peter Constable wrote as follows.

> Neither Unicode Inc. or ISO/IEC 10646 would _implement_ QID emoji.

That is correct. I should have made clear that I was referring to the 
specification for QID emoji rather than QID emoji. How quite to express 
precisely and concisely the formal acceptance of the specification by 
Unicode Inc. to become a published Unicode Inc. document giving the 
go-ahead for implementation by  anyone (not just software vendors) is 
somewhat difficult without using the word 'implement'.

Peter within his post also wrote  as follows.

> The PRI doc mentions the possibility of a registry for QID sequences; 
> a key benefit of a registry is that it may mitigate against these 
> non-interop risks. But the current proposal does not in fact provide 
> any mitigations for these issues other than the possibility that a QID 
> sequence might be at some point become an RGI sequence.

I put forward on Friday 8 November 2019 a suggestion that might help 
towards solving the problem.

https://www.unicode.org/review/pri408/

William Overington

Tuesday 12 November 2019