Missing "(Heavy)EQUAL SIGN-Emoji"

[Gabriel Tellez]

Yall missing the joke. It was made by ChatGPT. It was probably just told to
make a proposal.

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 8:02 AM Marius Spix via Unicode <
unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:

> I already suggested this in 2019. Here is the conversation.
>
>
>
>
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 18. Dezember 2019 um 14:43 Uhr
> *Von:* "Joao S. O. Bueno" <gwidion at gmail.com>
> *An:* "Marius Spix" <marius.spix at web.de>
> *Cc:* unicode at unicode.org
> *Betreff:* Re: HEAVY EQUALS SIGN
> I think that as your object is emoji drawing, not mathematics, this
> request can't
> be justified that way.
>
> Maybe it would make more sense to try and check whether modification
> combining
> characters to shift the change the combined character into other
> weight/decoration/color and/or other
> character effects could be built, that could be used not only along emoji,
> but with all other characters.
>
> Currently those transforms require the use of another text protocol, like
> HTML, or ANSI sequences
> for terminal, or even proprietary and add-hoc text file structures like
> Microsoft's .doc and .rtf (and other
> not that proprietary, but equally dependant on specific software to be
> proper rendered, like .ooxml and .odf).
>
> Since modificator characters for color and others have been tried and
> tested in Unicode land for
> some emojis, the ball to have in-unicode proper character transforms could
> start to roll -
>
> Does anyone know if there is already an initiative like that? I'd like to
> know more about it.
>
> (as for the O.P.: I think the way out for you now is to use an
> out-of-unicode markup
> to select a heavier-looking font for the `+` and `=` characters)
>
>      js
>    -><-
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 09:42, Marius Spix via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org>
> wrote:
>
> Unicode has a HEAVY PLUS SIGN (U+2795) and a HEAVY MINUS SIGN (U+2796).
> I wonder, if a HEAVY EQUALS SIGN could complete that character set.
> This would allow emoji phrases like 🐈 ➕👨= ❤️. (man plus cat equals
> love) looking typographically better, when you replace the equals sign
> with a new HEAVY EQUALS SIGN character. Thoughts?
>
> Marius
>
>
>
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 20. März 2023 um 05:59 Uhr
> *Von:* "Asmus Freytag via Unicode" <unicode at corp.unicode.org>
> *An:* unicode at corp.unicode.org
> *Betreff:* Re: Missing "(Heavy)EQUAL SIGN-Emoji"
> On 3/19/2023 4:01 PM, Sławomir Osipiuk via Unicode wrote:
>
> Quite a lot, actually, but at its heart it's still a computer and hence
> more likely to do what you tell it than what you want.
> I assume "LX" told ChatGPT to "write a proposal for a Heavy Equals Sign
> Emoji" rather than asking "Is there a Heavy Equals Sign Emoji defined in
> Unicode?"
>
> Right, and I had asked you do to it, you would have noticed it's there
> already and asked me why I was so daft to propose something as missing that
> is already present. Also, if you had concluded that a new character would
> be required, you would have argued why the seemingly existing one was not
> in fact the one that you thought is needed. That being a a requirement of a
> good proposal (explaining why seeming alternatives are not valid).
>
> So, if the role of the chatbot just consists of creating plausible
> sounding language, we should ban their use in submissions and
> communications with the Consortium. Because they may make it sound like a
> proposal or suggestion is well researched or thought out, when if fact it
> isn't, wasting everybody's time.
>
> A./
>
>
> On Sunday, 19 March 2023, 17:58:04 (-04:00), Asmus Freytag via Unicode
> wrote:
>
>
> Well, what can you expect from a message written by a chatbot?
>
> A./
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20230320/6e86999b/attachment.htm>