<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/14/2021 10:04 PM, Doug Ewell via
Unicode wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:000001d7a9ef$385aed80$a910c880$@ewellic.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">First, congratulations on the release of Unicode 14.0, the first new release since the pandemic in the Western Hemisphere began, if we can even imagine that.
Asmus Freytag wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Strong evidence of widespread use and strong evidence that can support
the supposition that this use will not be a flash in the pan, but
continue for decades.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
U+1FAF6 HEART HANDS
I don't believe UTC could approve a more frivolous and flash-in-the-pan character if it tried.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I don't have an opinion on individual characters, but the death
of emoji has been prognosticated many times. I personally don't
think we are at or even past "peak emoji" quite yet (in terms of
overall usage, that is). However, it would be interesting to see
whether anyone has bothered to collect data.</p>
<p>I recall seeing some list of usage frequencies on a relative
scale, but nothing about total emoji volume whether absolute or in
some percentages relative to other text in certain environments. <br>
</p>
<p>The per-character frequencies of any pictographic writing system
always have a long tail. That's why looking at any one member of
such a system always allows you to find examples that are "never
used". That doesn't tell you anything about the writing system
itself, and if you accept the need to support one, then you'll
inevitably pick up some of the tail; that's as it should be.</p>
<p>A./</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>