No more RGI flag sequences

[Mark Davis ☕️]

Part of the reason for providing a general mechanism that would make
all subdivision flags be valid was to provide an interchangeable way for
some platforms to supply additional subdivision flags. Then evidence of
popularity on those platforms could provide a strong signal for making a
particular subdivision flag be RGI. As it turned out,
(a) the frequency of usage of subdivision flags turned out to be quite low.
(The category of flags in general is already not stellar:
https://home.unicode.org/emoji/emoji-frequency/)
(b) adding more subdivision flags turned out to be a long, slippery slope,
and full of geopolitical landmines.

Mark


On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 11:10 AM Joan Montané <joan at montane.cat> wrote:

> Missatge de Doug Ewell via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org> del dia dg.,
> 7 de febr. 2021 a les 19:34:
> >
> > Mark Davis wrote:
> >
> > > The reasoning behind that has been at
> > > https://www.unicode.org/emoji/proposals.html#Flags (F2) for some time.
> >
> > Since I'm unlikely ever to submit a true emoji proposal (i.e. for a
> facial expression or animal or hand gesture), I probably wouldn't have
> thought to look at the "Submitting Emoji Proposals" page.
> >
> > That said, this passage in that section:
> >
> > > Adding further subdivision flags as RGI can also appear to play
> > > favorites unless similar subdivisions also get flags, which could mean
> > > “all other flags of that country” or “all subdivisions of greater or
> > > equal population in other countries”
> >
> > doesn't seem to align with the decision to exclude Northern Ireland.
> >
> > > The feasibility issues behind that reasoning would have to change
> > > substantially before FR could be revised.
> > >
> > > Note however that all the subdivision flags remain valid; just not
> > > recommended for general interchange.
> >
> > That basically means no vendor will support flag images for these
> places, and they will not be interchangeable in any medium that uses
> Unicode.
> >
>
> So, Unicode creates a universal encoding mechanism to represent flags
> from subdivision ISO territories years ago, and Unicode throws the key
> to the bottom of the sea now.
>
> I can understand that it is hard to put a line for which subdivision
> territories merit RGI. But closing RGI to UK is really
> English-focused.
>
> Just my 2 ct.
>
> Joan Montané
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20210207/b3fad099/attachment.htm>