Re: Emoji survey

From: Mark E. Shoulson (
Date: Sun Dec 28 2008 - 19:28:51 CST

James Kass wrote:
> Mark E. Shoulson wrote,
>> Whereas Klingon is formally *rejected* and not on the list of scripts to
>> encode for the crime of being too funny and embarrassing to encode. As
>> opposed to the much more dignified POOP emoji.
> Klingon doesn't appear to match Unicode's new cuteness criterion.
If I redrew the font with cutesy hearts and curlicues, could we get it
encoded, you think? Blogs and online articles didn't work, but they're
not cute like emoji.
> A Google search of ConScript Klingon PUA strings is disallowed,
> so this essential tool for determining web presence is disabled.
> is still up, though out of date (chicken and
egg problem: there isn't much material out there encoded as pIqaD partly
because pIqaD isn't encoded)... The back issues of Qo'noS QonoS at are available in pIqaD by appending "?mode=UTF"
to each URL (I don't think I have links to it directly; it isn't
supported after all). (Anyone who says that the translation of
transliteration into PUA proves that encoding is unnecessary is welcome
to scrap Unicode entirely and go back to all-ASCII days.)
> A Google search of "pIqaD", however, finds over 5000 hits,
> including one page which apparently offers a Klingon version
> of the popular "Scrabble" board game.
> Also, (at least) one blogger explains (and offers some kind
> of "patches") to enable pIqaD as a locale in Windows Vista.
Maybe if we made cute li'l anime Klingons, with adorable little
head-ridges...? They should at least document the cuteness requirement,


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