RE: Update on flag tags (PRI #299)?

From: Doug Ewell <>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:14:56 -0700

Ken Whistler <kenwhistler at att dot net> wrote:

> but the upshot is basically that the Emoji SC
> has general direction to take all the feedback and discussion and
> work up a more detailed proposal that addresses all of the issues
> involved. At some point that will appear as a new proposal for
> further discussion and decision. So stay tuned.


On Wed, 01 Jul 2015 16:20:08 +0000, Noah Slater <nslater at tumbolia dot
org> wrote:

>> <>
> Can someone help me understand what this means for my rainbow flag
> proposal?

I can't speak for Noah, nor for others who might want to propose a
non-region, non-subdivision flag emoji, but it might be helpful if the
Emoji SC can at least say whether that type of flag is expected to be
within the scope of their more detailed proposal. That might help Noah
and others decide whether they need to invest the effort to write up a
proposal for a unitary character.

Doug Ewell | | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸
Received on Thu Aug 13 2015 - 15:16:21 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Aug 13 2015 - 15:16:22 CDT