Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Fri Jan 09 2009 - 17:55:27 CST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Whistler's Conjecture (was: Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy)"

    On 1/9/2009 2:52 PM, André Szabolcs Szelp wrote:
    >> Stated bluntly like this, you would effectively rescind the 10th Unicode
    >> Design principle.
    >> Whenever that principle applies to a set, then non-PUA code points are in
    >> order, even if the characters violate some other design principle or the
    >> character-glyph model in some ways. That's the whole purpose of having #10.
    > Asmus, you don't treat the whole set in the current proposal either,
    > having the corporate logos... so this also violates #10?
    In principle, yes. However, the reasons for that exclusion are
    essentially legal, and not technical and the precedent is of some standing.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 09 2009 - 17:57:25 CST