QID emoji discussion and emoji encoding more genarally too (from Re: Base character plus tag sequences)

[wjgo_10009 at btinternet.com]

There is a new document about the QID Emoji proposal.

https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20110-qid-emoji.pdf

Also, please remember the following.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ldSVbXbjl4

The review is due to close on Monday 20 April 2020.

William Overington

Thursday 16 April 2020


------ Original Message ------
From: "wjgo_10009 at btinternet.com via Unicode" <unicode at unicode.org>
To: unicode at unicode.org
Sent: Monday, 2020 Mar 23 At 22:29
Subject: Base character plus tag sequences (from RE: Is the 
binaryness/textness of a data format a property?)

Doug Ewell wrote:

> When 137,468 private-use characters aren't enough?

In my opinion, a base character plus tag sequence has the potential to 
be used for many large scale applications for the future.

A base character plus tag sequence encoding has the advantage over a 
Private Use Area encoding (except for a prompt experimental use or for 
some applications) that the encoding can be unique and thus 
interoperability is possible amongst people generally.

QID emoji is just the very start of applications, some not even dreamed 
of yet, for which a base character sequence encoding could be used.

Once restrictions of the result of a specific encoding of being only 
allowed to be a fixed image are removed, then new information technology 
applications will be possible within text streams.

There is the QID Emoji Public Review and issues like this can be 
explored there so that they will be before the Unicode Technical 
Committee when it assesses the responses to the public review.

In my response of Monday 2 March 2020 I put forward an idea that could 
allow the idea of QID emoji to proceed yet without the disadvantages.

No comment after that has been published as of the time of sending this 
post.

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

Whatever your view on whether such ideas should be allowed to flourish 
and become mainstream in the future I opine that it would be good for 
there to be more responses to the public review so that as wide a range 
of views as possible are before the Unicode Technical Committee when it 
assesses the responses to the public review, not on just QID emoji as 
such but on whether the underlying method of encoding of a base 
character and tag character sequence for large sets of items should be 
encouraged.

William Overington

Monday 23 March 2020