Version linking?

A propos http://blog.unicode.org/2017/08/unicode-emoji-60-initial-drafts-draft.html I would like to know whether it is intended that Emoji version N will be always targeted at Unicode version N + 5 and published in year N + 2012. I did not find the question or answer at

Re: Version linking?

​Emoji versions are (currently) on a somewhat faster schedule than Unicode : U10.0 — ​ ​ E5.0, ​E6.0​ ​ (TBD)​ U09.0 — E3.0 ​, E4.0 Intermediate versions can't add any new characters, but can add sequences and properties, including "emojification" of existing characters. ​ {phone} On Aug 17,

Re: Version linking?

Thanks for your reply, but how can characters be used portably if they are not part of the published standard yet? Or is it that hereafter both Unicode Standard + Unicode Emoji Standard will be parallelly portable or something like that? -- Shriramana Sharma ஶ்ரீரமணஶர்மா श्रीरमणशर्मा

Re: Should U+3248 ... U+324F be wide characters?

2017-08-17 18:46 GMT+02:00 Asmus Freytag (c) via Unicode < unicode@unicode.org>: > On 8/17/2017 7:47 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote: > > 2017-08-17 16:24 GMT+02:00 Mike FABIAN via Unicode : > >> Asmus Freytag via Unicode さんはかきました: >> Most emoji now have "W",

Re: Version linking?

On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 18:34:56 +0530 Shriramana Sharma via Unicode wrote: > Thanks for your reply, but how can characters be used portably if they > are not part of the published standard yet? Or is it that hereafter > both Unicode Standard + Unicode Emoji Standard will be

Re: Version linking?

Mark Davis ☕️: > > E5.0 did have the emoji properties of some 10.0 characters a bit ahead of > time, but only after they were completely locked down. This should be absolutely avoided in the future, because it was effectively the other way around: No changes to the beta characters were possible

Re: Should U+3248 ... U+324F be wide characters?

2017-08-17 16:24 GMT+02:00 Mike FABIAN via Unicode : > Asmus Freytag via Unicode さんはかきました: > Most emoji now have "W", for example: > > 1F600..1F64F;W # So[80] GRINNING FACE..PERSON WITH FOLDED HANDS > > That seems correct because emoji behave more

Re: Version linking?

>Intermediate versions can't add any new characters, but can add sequences and properties, including "emojification" of existing characters. E.g. E4.0 didn't reference any characters from U10.0. It did recognize *sequences* of existing U9.0 characters. E5.0 did have the emoji properties of some

Re: Should U+3248 ... U+324F be wide characters?

On 8/17/2017 7:24 AM, Mike FABIAN wrote: Asmus Freytag via Unicode さんはかきました: On 8/16/2017 6:26 AM, Mike FABIAN via Unicode wrote: EastAsianWidth.txt contains: 3248..324F;A # No [8] CIRCLED NUMBER TEN ON BLACK SQUARE..CIRCLED NUMBER EIGHTY ON BLACK

Re: Should U+3248 ... U+324F be wide characters?

On 8/17/2017 7:47 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote: 2017-08-17 16:24 GMT+02:00 Mike FABIAN via Unicode >: Asmus Freytag via Unicode > さんはかきました: Most emoji now have "W", for example:

Re: Should U+3248 ... U+324F be wide characters?

Asmus Freytag via Unicode さんはかきました: > On 8/16/2017 6:26 AM, Mike FABIAN via Unicode wrote: > > EastAsianWidth.txt contains: > > 3248..324F;A # No [8] CIRCLED NUMBER TEN ON BLACK SQUARE..CIRCLED > NUMBER EIGHTY ON BLACK SQUARE > > i.e. it