Re: Emoji & compatibility characters

From: Christopher Fynn (
Date: Mon Jan 12 2009 - 00:27:47 CST

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Flag Symbols"

    On 05/01/2009, David Starner <> wrote:

    > On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Christopher Fynn <>
    > wrote:
    >> Leaving aside the fact that many of the emoji go way beyond what most
    >> people would reasonably consider to be part of plain text, removing
    >> the "pre-existing character set" limitation seems to open the door to
    >> any entity, large or influential enough to create or establish a
    >> de-facto or official "standard" of some sort, to eventually get the
    >> characters in such a set encoded as compatibility characters.

    >> Is Unicode sure it wants to go down this road?

    > Does Unicode have an option?

    ~ Probably not.

    > The market pressures to support other
    > standards didn't just disappear and people expect to be able to
    > roundtrip their information through Unicode without problems.

    If this is what the policy is now then Unicode & ISO 10646 need to
    clearly state somewhere that characters in other "standards" -
    pre-existing or new official or de-facto - are now legitimate
    canidates for encoding for interoperability reasons. And what the
    limitations on this policy are.

    - Chris

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 12 2009 - 00:30:28 CST