Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: James Kass (
Date: Mon Jan 05 2009 - 01:42:12 CST

  • Next message: Hans Aberg: "Re: Private-use agreements (was: Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy)"

    John Hudson wrote,

    >Peter, much earlier in this discussion, you mentioned that the companies
    >involved in proposing the emoji subset in some way understood that a
    >different mechanism would be needed to extend the set for users (and,
    >ergo, that Unicode was not facing encoding an open set of graphics). So
    >what prevents this other mechanism being used for the current subset
    >also? Since it is going to be necessary, and according to you the
    >companies understand that it will be necessary, why do they need this
    >contentious stop-gap measure of standardising their existing sets within
    >Unicode before proceeding to what must be a better solution for all emoji?

    There is nothing preventing this other mechanism being used
    for the current subset.

    It is clear that some other mechanism must already be available
    in order to handle the logo icons -- those logos have already been
    scratched from the proposal.

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2009 - 01:44:53 CST