Re: Emoji: chart updated with font glyph images

From: Mark Davis (
Date: Wed Jan 07 2009 - 13:58:41 CST

  • Next message: Ed Trager: "Re: UTF-8 and string manipulations in Java"

    Note that you can see a larger image with "View Image" in your browser also,
    such as:

    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 <> wrote:

    > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Roberts, Gary <>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
    >> SPACE.
    > Rick also commented on this name. We will rename e-039 GREEN EARTH to just
    > EARTH.
    > See
    > Font:
    >> 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
    > font.
    > 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.
    > Hearts:
    >> 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
    >> characters.
    > 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,
    > markus

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 07 2009 - 14:00:36 CST