Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: Mark Davis (
Date: Fri Jan 09 2009 - 12:58:37 CST

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy"

    On the procedural question:

    This list is for general public discussion of Unicode topics by any and all
    people who sign up to it. It is orthogonal to the decision-making process,
    which is governed by the procedures on

    In particular, as we often emphasize, none of the discussion on this list is
    captured. If non-voting members want the UTC to consider particular
    information on a given issue, they need to submit it via the online
    reporting form: "Feedback may be submitted via the online contact form []; be sure to indicate the issue you
    are providing feedback for, and try to be as explicit as possible in your
    suggestions." [conciseness is also a valued by the committee...]

    For particular requests on the proposal, such as name changes,
    dis/unifications, glyph feedback, and so on, Markus, as chair of the symbols
    subcommittee, has requested that that initial feedback go to the
    emoji4unicode mailing list, where it is being processed. The issues and
    provisional resolutions for the working proposal for the UTC are being
    developed are being tracked there, as he's described.


    P.S. I'm glad you're being entertained :-) While there are certainly
    legitimate differences of opinion on this topic, I don't know that I've
    heard much *new *information in a while (as opposed to restatements of
    pretty well-known positions).

    On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:01, Van Riper <> wrote:

    > Might I digress briefly to ask a procedural question?
    > Clearly, there is no consensus emerging in these discussions. As a
    > fairly impartial observer, I can also state that despite the volume of
    > plain text (;-)) contained in the ongoing arguments there have not
    > been any really new points raised for some time now.
    > So, how do we best proceed in such a situation?
    > I've hesitated bringing this up because as a fairly impartial observer
    > it has been rather entertaining to follow the discourse here. =)
    > Cheers, Van
    > P.S. For those that don't know, I used to be a member of the Technical
    > Committee during my tenure at VeriSign where my focus was on security
    > considerations. Since my departure from VeriSign to work on more
    > mundane consumer software, I am still a strong advocate of Unicode and
    > have continued to monitor this list.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 09 2009 - 13:00:13 CST