RE: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: Erkki I. Kolehmainen (eik@iki.fi)
Date: Sat Jan 03 2009 - 14:32:13 CST

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy"

    +1

    Erkki I. Kolehmainen
    Tilkankatu 12 A 3, FI-00300 Helsinki, Finland
    Puh. (09) 4368 2643, 0400 825 943; Tel. +358 9 4368 2643, +358 400 825 943

    -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
    Lähettäjä: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]
    Puolesta Asmus Freytag
    Lähetetty: 3. tammikuuta 2009 21:31
    Vastaanottaja: Doug Ewell
    Kopio: Unicode Mailing List
    Aihe: Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

    On 1/3/2009 9:59 AM, Doug Ewell wrote:
    > Asmus Freytag <asmusf at ix dot netcom dot com> wrote:
    >
    >>> ...unless they are unsuited for plain text encoding because of their
    >>> very nature.
    >>>
    >> Such as, for example, stateful controls, code-set shifting commands
    >> and other strange beasts, that would be difficult, if not impossible
    >> to handle as compatibility characters. I can easily conceive of more
    >> exotic examples, if that helps.
    >
    > I find it intriguing that in the world of plain-text character
    > encoding, which has embraced a limited set of stateful controls at
    > least since the Baudot/Murray era, the notion of stateful controls is
    > being dismissed out of hand,
    Unicode was definitely designed in firm opposition to ISO 2022 as well
    as ISO 10646 DIS-1 which all use(d) stateful controls to achieve
    code-set switching. Trying to reintroduce this, for example for private
    use set switching, is to take aim at one of the core design goals for
    the standard.
    > while colored, animated drawings of baby chicks popping out of their
    > eggs are considered "compatibility characters."
    >
    > (I almost wrote "chirping." Are audio-enabled characters on the
    > horizon?)
    Been there, done that: U+0007, the control code to ring the BELL on your
    terminal predates Unicode by decades!

    Cheers!

    A./

    PS: I'm content to allow the proposers to suggest the use of
    'cartoon-style' drawings that suggest movement by graphical means. If
    that's what they end up proposing and if that is satisfactory for
    interoperability purposes, then I have no further problem. (I also would
    not have a problem if user agents that display yellow emoticons were to
    give a colorful rendition of U+263A).

    If the proposal can be formulated that way, the whole line of argument
    falls by the wayside and the live animation becomes a modern form of
    glyph variant.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 03 2009 - 14:34:40 CST