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

But today's new emojis do not come all from Japanese. Many new emojis zre not even tied to Asian cultures. I don't see why a candle, or train, or F1 racing car would necessarily be square, they would look just ugly (with excessive horizontal margins, or smaller than needed with excessive vertical

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

Per UTS #51 (see http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Design_Guidelines ): "Current practice is for emoji to have a square aspect ratio, deriving from their origin in Japanese. For interoperability, it is recommended that this practice be

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

I don't think that emojis are necessarily "square", they could be larger (e.g. a train or a snake or an horizontal railway, or a group of several peoples, or a cloud) or narrower (e.g. a candle). Rendering them as square will make sense only in contexts where this makes sense ** if possible** :

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

On 18 Aug 2017, at 00:50, Philippe Verdy via Unicode > wrote: 2017-08-17 18:46 GMT+02:00 Asmus Freytag (c) via Unicode >: On 8/17/2017 7:47 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote: 2017-08-17 16:24 GMT+02:00 Mike

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

"Asmus Freytag (c) via Unicode" さんはかきました: > 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

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: 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?

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: 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

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

On 8/16/2017 7:23 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: These squared (or circled) characters however do not have registered variants for digits with descenders (used in traditional typographic fonts for Latin), such as 4, 7 or 9, or variable-width

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

I do agree, only CJK fonts using in CJK contexts will render them as "W" (i.e. the fixed-width srandard ideogaphic composition square). If they are used in Latin, they will adopt the metrics of the Latin font including them, thery will be square but not necessarily aligned with the ideographic

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

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 classifies the width of the characters at codepoints between 3248 and