Fwd: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: André Szabolcs Szelp (a.sz.szelp@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jan 05 2009 - 15:15:23 CST

  • Next message: Markus Scherer: "Re: Emoji: swings of fashion"

    This went by accident in private instead to the list.

    Please, list admins, change the reply-to header to be set to the
    address of the list.

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: André Szabolcs Szelp <a.sz.szelp@gmail.com>
    Date: 2009/1/5
    Subject: Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy
    To: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>

    >> E-mail can be plain-text or rich-text. There has never been any
    >> requirement that all the information contained within a rich-text document
    >> will be round-trippable with a plain-text application.
    > Right, but these are data streams that use a plain-text protocol, no matter
    > how you'd wish you could redefine that.

    Well, in a proprietary *post-Unicode-1.0* private plain-text protocol encoding.

    I remember that the missing charachters for round-tripping ARMSCII
    with Unicode were dismissed with it being post-Unicode, and Unicode
    would _only_ ensure round-tripping pre-Unicode legacy encodings...


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2009 - 15:18:01 CST