From: Ruszlan Gaszanov (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Dec 26 2008 - 03:48:01 CST
On Friday, December 26, 2008 1:30 AM, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>The emoji list contains another part of this notional core set, together
>with many elements that in my view are outside the core. I
>wholeheartedly support the inclusion of all elements that are also part
>of this notional core set, but I'm OK with encoding the whole of the
>emoji set, because of the utility of complete coverage for a set that is
>in actual digital use (and I don't need to repeat all the arguments
>here). I would be even happier, if the remaining parts of what I
>consider the core-universal set of general symbols could also be added
>to Unicode - but that will take separate proposals and discussion.
Well, the argument about complete coverage is sort of mute IMHO since the
set contains a whole bunch of corporate logos that can not be encoded due to
rather strict policy on this subject. Therefore, the vendors will be stuck
with using PUA for this subset in any case.
I think a much more sensible approach would be to break the whole rag-tag
set into subsets of more-or-less related symbols and consider each subset
individually instead of trying to encode the whole thing at once.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:33:07 CST