No more RGI flag sequences

[Christoph Päper]

Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode:
> 
> Flags of Northern Ireland have a complicated history. Given that the political parties in Northern Ireland have considered the issue and were unable to come to a conclusion, there is no agreement in Unicode that it should be RGI.

For all other (sub-)national flag emojis, Unicode does not suggest a particular design, not raus its existence for the RGI label. Vendors would be free to display the one of TW the same as CN, for instance, but they decided to not show it at all in devices for the mainland Chinese market. 

There are really just two reasonable options:

1. Treat GBNIR the same as GBENG, GBSCT and GBWLS, i.e. either recommend its flag emoji for general interchange or deprecate them all. 
2. Unrecommend all RIS emoji flags that similarly have no clearly defined design distinct from their parent region, e.g. UM or simply all that are marked as “dependent” (which is equivalent to “not independent”) in ISO 3166. 

> It is a valid Emoji, so if any party wants to supply a font with a glyph design of their choice, they are free to do so. Just as any party can supply a font with Phaistos disk symbols or other Unicode characters.

That is a non-sequitur comparison. It’s more like all font vendors only supporting combining diacritics for roman letters if the combination also exists as a precomposed character – and maintainers of open source fonts rejecting any contributions for other combinations, stating the fact that Unicode does not actively require support for them as the reason. (See several issues and PRs in the Github repositories of Noto Color Emoji and Twemoji.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20210208/18a67e26/attachment.htm>