From: Kenneth Whistler (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jan 09 2009 - 17:22:48 CST
> Then please, let's wait for two hundred years and let's see which of
> those newly invented emoji stood the test of time. I really won't
> object encoding the surviving ones retrospectively.
80% of what is *already* encoded in the Unicode Standard
has not stood the test of time -- they are archaic characters
of no current use except for their existence in historic
This is the thrust of Mark's comment awhile ago. The
615 emoji in the proposal *are* in current use, and pose
an interoperability problem now for current implementations.
Whether or not they survive in current usage another 200
years is beside the point. If they don't, they will just
join the character ash-heap along with lots of other
symbols, ideographs, and entire writing systems.
People who seem so het-up about the Unicode Standard
"promoting" the use of bunny-ear emoticons simply don't
seem to have caught on to the implications of the existence
and use of a universal character encoding -- as Marc Crispin
has tried to point out, repeatedly.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 09 2009 - 17:24:33 CST