From: Mark Davis (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jan 07 2009 - 13:58:41 CST
Note that you can see a larger image with "View Image" in your browser also,
Please send any specific feedback on names / images you have to the
emoji4unicode list so that we can track it.
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:53, Markus Scherer <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Roberts, Gary <Gary.Roberts@teradata.com>wrote:
>> I don't like colours in character names unless I understand the
>> reasoning (for example, I have no issues with RED DRAGON). The only example
>> I caught that I do not understand is GREEN EARTH. Perhaps EARTH VIEWED FROM
> Rick also commented on this name. We will rename e-039 GREEN EARTH to just
> See http://code.google.com/p/emoji4unicode/issues/detail?id=52
>> The font looks pixel based (not surprising given the history of the
>> encoded symbols). I think it needs to be line based. I particularly object
>> to pixel based shading being used.
> The font is an outline font, but the chart uses font images (.png files)
> generated from the font's glyphs, to avoid having everyone download the
> I would prefer the font to look more symbol like, and less picture like.
>> There is too much detail for me in this font. For example, I prefer the
>> DoCoMo #172 glyph to the proposed e-008 glyph, although I think I would
>> prefer not to have a black background (Maybe a white cresent moon with stars
>> similar to the one in your porposed glyph, and no buildiings.). I understand
>> that what I am asking for would be a lot of work, but I figure it doesn't
>> hurt to ask.
> I will note it as an issue. Personally, I don't care much about the
> particular shapes as long as they are representative. The glyphs we have
> were designed by someone (or some team) at Apple.
>> Not sure about all these hearts, particularly distinctions between e-B13 -
>> e-B16 Is there any semantics associated with the colour differences? Given
>> the DoCoMo 'unification' of these, this appears to be a candidate for
>> variant selectors.
> Both KDDI and SoftBank distinguish these, and we apply the source
> separation rule.
> Source seperation rule:
>> I think we should use variant selectors instead of encoding duplicate
> That's still source separation, it just pushes the encoding of such
> characters from separate code points to separate registered variation
> sequences, which is a more complicated mechanism and not usually done for
> Unicode symbols.
> Best regards,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 07 2009 - 14:00:36 CST