From: Leo Broukhis (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jan 09 2009 - 16:53:52 CST
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Kenneth Whistler <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Wouldn't that classify it as "Known script, but insufficient
>> information to do a decent job of rough pre-allocation, and/or
>> insufficient to know whether a pre-allocation is warranted", and
>> therefore not in the roadmap?
> Nice try, Leo. But the emoji set is completely enumerated,
> in cross-tabular full splendor.
Completely? Is e-1E3 CRAB in or out, then? Why or why not?
Where's the (at least de facto) guarantee that in a year, or three, or
five, there will not be another 618*N characters because vendors will
have decided to allow the users to select background and foreground
colors ("smiling pale face at night"?), or to select the level of
animation of a particular icon ("snapshot of fireworks" vs
"fireworks"?) and will have provisionally encoded that yet again in
PUA instead of markup? What is emoji for another several dozen of cute
fruits (where is my favorite PINEAPPLE GUAVA?) or animals (where is my
favorite KIWI BIRD?) are requested by the users? And how insensitive
is to have POODLE but not SHIBA INU nor AKITA INU?!
>So there is plenty of information to know how to allocate it -- not merely how to pre-allocate
> it. In fact the proposal online right now has a fully explicit
> listing and exact code point suggestions.
How many columns will be definitely enough to pre-allocate for emoji?
>> Or would using Kikakui encoded in PUA in cell phones make it
>> immediately eligible for encoding?
> Here you go:
> Contact them and get started on your business case for adding
> Kikakui to their phones.
I am just asking if it would make it eligible as far as UTC is concerned.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 09 2009 - 16:54:49 CST