From: Johannes Bergerhausen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Apr 21 2009 - 08:29:05 CDT
(excuse my bad english)
while the meeting in Dublin is taking place, i would like to express
my opinon about the decision about Emoji and Symbols.
I fully support the interest to encode all Emoji characters. These
symbols are already in use by millions of people in asia, so, of
course, they should be encoded.
But a disagree to encode it the way it is proposed by N3583.
I think N3607 is a much better way to go.
N3614, Response to Concerns Raised in N3607, can not convince me.
The most important point for me is that the moment these characters
will be part of the Unicode Standard, these symbols stop being *just*
asian emojis ó they become international symbols, accessible for the
So, if we like it or if we donít like it, we have to think about
symbols in general and the way they should be added to the UCS.
I understand that there is much fear, if we start to put, say, FROG
into it, where will we stop?
There are 1.75 million species on earth, so where do we draw the line?
On the other hand, I understand the opinion: If you start to encode,
say, the asian zodiac, you should to the whole set.
It is stupid to only encode half of a well known and documented set.
So, I agree with Asmus that we have to find a position in the middle.
I think: the encoding community should think and work on real and
simple categories: which symbol is worth it to be put in an such
important standard as UCS and which symbol should be left out.
For example something like this: The symbol is in documented use in 10
Only the true global symbols should go into an global standard.
Following this Bedingungen, STOP would be in, but SPEED LIMIT 30 would
be out (because it is different in different countries).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Apr 21 2009 - 08:33:44 CDT