From: John Hudson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jan 08 2009 - 23:49:50 CST
Michael D'Errico wrote:
> The PUA allows you to handle non-
> text data directly in Unicode inside your application. Such use can
> be very powerful. To say that that power must remain trapped inside
> your application because it is not text is unnecessarily restrictive.
> The emoji illustrate this power -- transmitting fully animated color
> images in a few bytes is an efficient use of bandwidth.
Indeed. But what we learn from this is that the technology used for text
encoding and interchange may be adaptable to other kinds of content, not
that all content is text. My objection to encoding most of the proposed
emoji characters in Unicode is that this makes Unicode a dumping ground
for things that are outside of Unicode's stated remit. Further, having
seen how much time is required of how many people to manage a text
encoding standard, I am concerned that this standard organisation, as
currently constituted and with its agreements with ISO and other
organisations, should not be taking on the task of encoding non-textual
Your suggestion, Michael, is to modify how the Unicode standard works in
order to encode emoji and similar non-text content in a flexible and
extensible way. My suggestion is that this content belongs in a
different standard altogether, one that is focused on non-text content.
-- Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com Gulf Islands, BC email@example.com The Lord entered her to become a servant. The Word entered her to keep silence in her womb. The thunder entered her to be quiet. -- St Ephrem the Syrian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 08 2009 - 23:51:25 CST