From: Philippe Verdy (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Oct 14 2007 - 03:51:28 CDT
Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> ambiguous). Actually, the "-icon" part of the name "emoticon" describes
> well, but the "emot-" part is more vague.
The "emot-" part is very suggestive to the way they are the most frequently
used and seen today.
> > (much
> > more than smileys that are the most reduced forms of emoticons
> > restricted to plain-text using some form of "ASCII Art").
> I think the real history is the reverse. Emoticons were invented as "ASCII
> Art", later turned (to some extent) into small images, included into
> and even encoded as characters.
I have not used any term that means a historic precedence. "Restricted" just
means what it is, without timing assumptions, it does not mean that a
restriction has been applied, just that smileys were found to be too
restrictive and not enough suggestive, and emoticons extended them for the
convenience of many users, and with a lot more possibility for creativity
(in addition, emoticons can become language neutral and are easily
understood by more people, when most smileys cannot).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 14 2007 - 03:52:58 CDT