QID emoji (from Re: The encoding of flags)
wjgo_10009 at btinternet.com
Fri Oct 8 07:30:23 CDT 2021
Rebecca Bettencourt wrote:
> Having it work properly everywhere would only happen if Unicode
> approved it or a third party with the clout of Apple or Google
> implemented it. And...
>> If there was sufficient user demand for it.
Sort of like the Webdings glyphs.
Is it the case that Microsoft of its own decision, nothing to do with an
existing user demand, designed the Webdings glyphs, put them in a font
and bundled the font as a "free with" font in with the Windows operating
system? So end users found them available, then used them, so then they
were widely used.
If I remember correctly, when those glyphs were later proposed to be
encoded into The Unicode Standard, there was a little speculation from
outsiders as to whether some other large businesses would object, but in
the event they did not.
However, suspending your disbelief to the extent necessary as if
watching Star Trek with its holodeck, suppose some people read my novels
and consider that they would like a system as in the novels all
implemented in real life unambiguously and interoperably between
platforms in email systems and web pages and on mobile telephones, how
could that "user demand" have any effect when the idea is not originated
BY a big business, nor AT a university, but by someone NOT representing
What does "sufficient" in the phrase "sufficient user demand" mean in
Is the bar so high as to be unreachable in practice?
Friday 8 October 2021
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode