QID Emoji (from Re: Wireless Connection Symbol)

wjgo_10009 at btinternet.com wjgo_10009 at btinternet.com
Thu May 28 13:10:57 CDT 2020

QID Emoji (from Re: Wireless Connection Symbol)

Kent Karlsson wrote as follows.

> I agree with Asmus that the ”QID emoji” is a really bad idea.

I opine that when considering a new idea it is important to be prepared 
to suspend disbelief and consider if any parts of the idea are good, 
rather than just the total idea.

I find the QID Emoji proposal has some very good aspects but is somewhat 
unstable as a whole.

So, if those in favour of the proposal and those against are each 
willing to be like the strongest trees and sway in the breeze then the 
good parts of the proposal could become available in a stable manner.

For example, maybe registration in a Unicode Inc. database, with the 
option of a cross-reference link to QID, would mean that only those QID 
where someone wants an emoji for that QID would be in the Unicode Inc. 
database, and a gentle moderation policy could be used to stop ambiguity 
and duplication. So maybe shorter codes.

What if U+FFF0 is defined, mutatis mutandis, as effectively what would 
be a ligature of the ID emoji and tag Q in the original proposal, U+FFF8 
is defined as the corresponding CANCEL and circled digits are used. All 
part of the basic plane, so fewer bytes for each such character and a 
graceful indicative fallback facility built in.

I realize that the original proposal can be implemented with existing 
technology, and that the changes I suggest would require changes to The 
Unicode Standard and software packages, but that could be done in time 
if there is the will to do so, yet whatever solution is implemented is 
there for a very long time.

Would those two changes both go a long way towards making a solution 
that is acceptable to everybody?

I may not have solved every objection and what I suggest does change the 
original. Yet this is research for the future. So, if people agree, 
please say so, if not then please say what I have missed or got wrong 
and what needs fixing and then, as a group effort, maybe we can iterate 
in a constructive way and achieve a good solution acceptable to 

William Overington

Thursday 28 May 2020

More information about the Unicode mailing list