From: Ruszlan Gaszanov (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jan 09 2009 - 07:45:51 CST
Adam Twardoch wrote:
>I'm sorry, but I fail to see how emoji is non-text. To me, emoji are
>very much text -- as I wrote before, they're the new, vastly extended
>set of punctuation characters.
The reason why there is such a strong disagreement on whether emoji are text or not is because we are discussing a large set of very different entities. Some of those entities (especially if we discard color/animation aspects) are indeed very much text-like (akin to punctuation marks or ideographic characters). Others, IMHO, are simply inline graphics (no different from Office clipart), and the fact that some applications are using PUA codepoints as placeholders for those inline graphics does not automatically make them text elements.
As I have suggested before, I think we should abandon the idea of encoding the whole set at once and consider each subset of related elements separately. The argument about the value of complete coverage is mute because some elements of the set (i.e. corporate logos) are not considered for encoding in any case.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 09 2009 - 07:47:18 CST