Lee Shallis wrote: > [Are there [start] emoji [end] style codes?] If not I suggest making > them so you're no longer constrained to the tiny range of potential > codes that unicode offers.
Unicode has more than 800,000 unassigned code points, which I don’t consider “tiny.” Continuing to dip into this pool is considered preferable to introducing a new stateful “begin/end” mechanism, and all of the problems that those bring along. James Kass replied: > The inappropriate religious material after the message should have > been removed by the moderators. +1, emphatically. Phil Smith III replied (to Lee): > For starters, you’re confusing Unicode with encoding. This confused me greatly, until I realized Phil meant “... with ISO 2022-style shift-in/shift-out encoding.” Technically, you can in fact combine Unicode with ISO 2022 (for whatever reason), but adding a new mechanism, outside of Unicode, to encode emoji makes no sense at all. > Now, I can imagine modifier characters, like combining accents, that > would change skin tones etc.—but I’d rather not: combiners have caused > enough trouble, and I’d hate to see new ones added. Um, isn’t that how skin tones are specified already? -- Doug Ewell, CC, ALB | Lakewood, CO, US | ewellic.org
