RE: Emoji: Public Review December 2008

From: Ruszlan Gaszanov (
Date: Tue Dec 23 2008 - 16:04:47 CST

>> It's been alleged that some of this material is leaking out of closed
>> systems and infiltrating databases and so forth.
> More than alleged. We have multiple vendor testimony that this
> is becoming a major headache for them.

Personally, I fail to see how a few relatively meaningless emoji leaking out
as PUA codepoints is a major problem. There are much more meaningful and
useful PUA applications out there leaking into Interenet, yet no one is
complaining so loudly about it.

I do admit there are quite a few symbols in emoji set that I personally find
very useful and worth encoding in the standard, but there are great many
that are problematic at best and meaningless crap at worst. Then again,
there are quite a few very useful symbols outside emoji set that UTC refuses
to encode.

Is Unicode/ISO 10646 now becoming a catalog of any nonsense some vendor
decides to encode as plain text? Then let's encode all the symbols of any
possible dingbat font we can find. Or do you have to distribute a certain
number of copies of an application that includes your proprietary dingbat
fonts in order to get your favorite dingbats encoded in the standard?


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:33:07 CST