Re: Emoji-- all or nothing?

From: vunzndi@vfemail.net
Date: Tue Jan 06 2009 - 16:24:57 CST

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

    Quoting "Asmus Freytag" <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>:

    > On 1/6/2009 4:13 AM, Michael Everson wrote:
    >> On 6 Jan 2009, at 06:37, John Hudson wrote:
    >>
    >>> One might object that this means any emoji character would require
    >>> four bytes instead of two, but that is also true if Unicode
    >>> surrogate characters are used, and opposition to encoding emoji
    >>> within the BMP seems stiffer than opposition to encoding them per
    >>> se.
    >>
    >> I'm not sure I even want them in the SMP. I'm thinking Plane 14, at
    >> least for the dodgier ones.
    > Some people have made it clear they prefer plane 15 :-)
    >

    Or plane 16:-)

    > A./
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 06 2009 - 16:27:08 CST