Re: Facepalm gesture/emoticon proposal

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Thu Mar 03 2011 - 15:12:59 CST

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Facepalm gesture/emoticon proposal"

    Asmus Freytag <asmusf at ix dot netcom dot com> wrote:

    >> If an argument can be brought forward that facepalm somehow completes
    >> a set, albeit unintentional, of universal gestures already in
    >> Unicode, I believe that it should be considered in earnest.
    > And that points the problem with attempts such as Doug's to come to a
    > definite conclusion by a discussion on this list in a way that
    > seemingly pre-empt the activity of the coding committees.

    I think that's an exaggeration of what I was trying to do. I've
    certainly said in the past of other suggestions that they would "never"
    be accepted, but I'm gradually learning that nothing is completely off
    the table.

    What I said most recently is that lohmatii shouldn't expect these two
    gestures to be encoded any time soon. That's a prediction from an
    outsider, and it may well turn out to be false.

    Initially I suggested that lohmatii should check with the Symbols
    Subcommittee, which is hardly the same as trying to pre-empt it, and
    that he might need better evidence than "may be" for disunifying
    one-palm from two-palms, which again is hardly an attempt to legislate.

    > Mind you, it's fine to point out process, precedents, policies and
    > criteria to a potential submitter, but anything beyond that is just
    > opinion. This list does not have standing in the decision, only the
    > character encoding committees do.

    Agreed. Never called that into question.

    > And I think it is crucial that we make sure they retain their ability
    > to judge each proposal on its merits, and to allow them to come to
    > conclusions that reflect the particular case. The number of actual
    > proposals submitted that are entire frivolous is rather small, so
    > there's no urgent need to do anything about the process.

    I don't think I suggested changing the process. lohmatii's original
    question to the public list was whether it was "possible" that his
    suggested symbols would be encoded. Since the public list has no
    standing in the decision to encode or not, perhaps the stock answer to
    all such questions should be, "I don't know; write up a proposal and
    find out."

    > (The number of "random ideas" brandished about on this list is rather
    > higher - should we shut down the list?)

    Sarcasm, I hope?

    Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA |
    RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s ­

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 03 2011 - 15:17:31 CST