Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: Leo Broukhis (
Date: Mon Jan 05 2009 - 17:50:09 CST

  • Next message: David Starner: "Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy"

    On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Michael D'Errico <> wrote:

    > The whole point of my proposal is to make plain text capable of handling
    > more complex "thingies" like the emoji without markup. And it provides
    > a streamlined path from private use to regular use for such things,
    > without the need for approval of individual "characters" on a code-by-
    > code basis. The DoCoMo logo, for example, would just be another emoji
    > "word" using the same alphabet. Currently it is forbidden because it
    > cannot be encoded individually.

    Why limit the emoji alphabet to ASCII, then? I bet that Japanese users
    would rather see "emoji kana" or "emoji kanji" instead of English if
    someone sends them an emoji that is not in their phone. Instead of
    duplicating all the world alphabets in the "emoji" space, why not have
    just two characters: EMOJI LEFT QUOTE and EMOJI RIGHT QUOTE (are these
    names BiDi-compliant?)
    If the emoji-quoted text (in whatever language) matches a picture tag
    - and a picture can have multiple tags in multiple languages - in the
    mobile phone database, or in the webmail provider database, or in the
    MUA database, the corresponding picture will be displayed instead,
    otherwise the text will be displayed in a distinctive way.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2009 - 17:51:45 CST