Encoding ConScripts

[Anshuman Pandey]

Oh, how timely!

At IUC 45 next Thursday, Deborah Anderson and I will be presenting on “Negotiating Neographies: Approaches for Encoding Newly-Invented Scripts”.

I’ll be discussing some metrics that may be used for evaluating neographies (nod to Ken W for that term), conscripts, or whatever you’d like to call them.

Such metrics, as James pointed out, are necessary, especially considering the influx of proposals to encode newly-invented scripts, particularly those of Africa and South Asia.

Sorry Mark, we won’t be covering Klingon…

❤️🍆 or whatever it was that y’all decided was the emoji for ‘thank you’.

All my best,
Anshu

> On Oct 8, 2021, at 11:43 PM, James Kass via Unicode <unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2021-10-08 6:08 PM, William_J_G Overington via Unicode wrote:
>> Allowing abstract emoji could open up great possibilities. I have already designed some abstract emoji for personal pronouns, colourful, language-independent, clearly distinct each from the others yet within a related design framework.
> 
> Anyone approaching Unicode with proposed new characters needs to point to existing use.  (Excluding emoji and items such as new currency symbols or era names.)
> 
> Anyone designing new glyphs for personal pronouns is not creating “emoji”, but rather is inventing a ConScript.  Most of us know that there’s a registry for ConScripts using the PUA.  So it would be necessary to assign PUA code points, generate a font, make the font generally available, publicize it, and hope it catches on.
> 
> That seems to be the only clear path to Unicoding novel characters. If the PUA material usage reaches some kind of critical mass, someone would draft a proposal to Unicode.
> 
> That could be perceived as a “high bar”.  But it’s quite reasonable and realistic.  And it’s not insurmountable.  And once that critical mass has been achieved, such glyphs would be on-topic for this forum.