Mark E. Shoulson
mark at kli.org
Thu Oct 13 18:38:06 CDT 2022
Again, this way lieth madness. People aren't satisfied with an emoji
for "female teacher with dark hair"; they want "TALL, THIN, female
PHYSICS teacher with dark hair IN PRINCESS-LEIA BUNS AND A PIERCED
EYEBROW (GOLD RING)." And if you give in on "welllllll, okay, we'll
give in on the tall/short...," you're only encouraging them to beg for
the rest. ("How about only a _little_ tall? How about
(Though my opinion isn't actually quite what that sounds like: even I
admit that there probably *are* things that are appropriate to give in
on, and I know we all can argue all the day long about them.)
On 10/13/22 09:22, William_J_G Overington via Unicode wrote:
> Thank you for posting about this.
> Could one use variation selectors with this too, so as to have a
> default style of glasses and various styles of glasses available?
> Or would one need to have separate styles of glasses each encoded
> If both approaches are possible, which one would be better?
> If it is to be encoded, and I hope it will be, it would be good to go
> for the lot all at once. Lots of styles as glasses are in lots of styles.
> In my opinion it is no use just doing one and leaving the rest for
> some future time as that is often a recipe for the rest never getting
> If the lot is done as one grand forward leap then that is the way to
> keep Unicode thriving.
> William Overington
> Thursday 13 October 2022
More information about the Unicode