Date: Mon Dec 22 2008 - 03:19:46 CST
Quoting "Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven" <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
Whilst the emoji suggested are a somewhat mixed and messy bag, if one
accepts the encoding of symbols.
> why not?
> 1) It seems focused on Japan only with a heavy cultural bias as well,
Internationalization is the inclusion characters used in different
cultures, presence in just one culture is significant
> 2) I think the emoji are NOT used for SMS/MMS, but rather the mail messages
> Japanese phone users are used to send between phones -- so what good is it
> on the world scale?
> 3) Given a decent consortium/standards body you could stabilize the PUA
> involved, why the need for encoding it within Unicode?
Even is you get agreement on which pua points to use, there is no way
to say what others will use these pua for.
There are many limitations for pua code points, for examples google
searches do not included pua.
> 4) It is not altogether a convincing argument it should be encoded within
> Unicode based on Unicode's own guidelines/rules.
Or rather, as has been pointed out why a large number of other symbols
should not be encoded:)
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
> ????? ?????? ??? ?? ??????
> http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
> Sometimes things stare us in the face and we are too blind to see...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:33:07 CST