RE: Emoji and cell phone character sets...

From: Peter Constable (
Date: Sat Jan 10 2009 - 12:20:28 CST

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy"

    From: [] On Behalf Of Christopher Fynn

    >> ... how do you define character identity?
    >> ... how do you know they are not mere *glyph
    >> variants* of the character FLEDGELING?? Having had assigned different
    >> private JIS-codes in the operators' private standard does not make
    >> them different characters, as we've seen it with preexisting standards
    >> of Arabic (having a codepoints for every positional variant) or the
    >> previously cited Chinese national standard using PUA for precomposed
    >> Tibetan glyphs!
    > BTW This is not hypothetical, there are already cell phones available in
    > Tibet which use a pre-composed Tibetan character set:
    > <>.

    And all of those pre-composed elements can be represented using existing Unicode characters with reliable round-trip-ability. So, we won't be needing to encode those as separate characters in Unicode (just in case anybody was wondering).


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 10 2009 - 12:23:17 CST