VS: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: Erkki I. Kolehmainen (eik@iki.fi)
Date: Mon Jan 05 2009 - 08:03:39 CST

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy"

    Comments on two specific points:

    The EURO SIGN was not at all undisputed at the time when it was introduced
    to the standardization process, since a lot of purist techies felt that the
    currency codes would be all that's needed in this day and age. Furthermore,
    it had been originally defined by the European Union as an extremely strict
    logo intended for use as illustration only (e.g., in the banknotes), see
    e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_sign. Getting it accepted in the
    many parallel standardization processes (involving the national bodies) was
    not an easy ride, in spite of the fact that the global IT industry was very
    actively participating in the (CEN) project team "Standardization of the
    Euro in IT" - I know, I was the project leader.

    I don't think that anyone is or has been or should be in the godly position
    to tell him/herself or anyone else that such-and-so character or symbol is
    something that Unicode would or would not consider encoding. Everything is
    up in the air now (as it has always been).

    Sincerely,

    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 Doug Ewell
    Lähetetty: 5. tammikuuta 2009 6:53
    Vastaanottaja: Unicode Mailing List
    Kopio: Asmus Freytag; Michael Everson; James Kass
    Aihe: Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

    ...
    EURO SIGN is not an ideal example. It was well known and undisputed in
    1998 that this symbol would become ubiquitous and globally important
    within a few years. The restriction against novel characters was
    clearly and explicitly intended to exclude characters whose importance
    and/or staying power was unknown. (Principles and Procedures, section
    H.10: "The euro sign... is a novel symbol for which there is
    demonstrated and strong demand.")

    And even if EURO SIGN did break the rule against "novel" symbols, there
    was only one of them, not 618.
    ...

    ...
    I can no longer tell myself or anyone else that such-and-so character or
    symbol is something that Unicode would or would not consider encoding.
    Everything is up in the air now.
    ...

    --
    Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
    http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
    http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2009 - 08:06:48 CST