On 2/14/02 8:34 PM, "Markus Scherer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They are already encoded in Unicode, using two or more Unicode characters...
> using a colon and a closing parenthesis (I personally prefer the version with
> a "dash" nose) is all you need.
The same could be said about dingbat arrows... Like dash-greaterthan and
lessthan-dash-equal... Or superimposing a circumflex over a vertical bar.
The impulse to ask about this came about by using multiple emailers,
messaging systems, etc and having each interpret the faces and smiles
("emoticons") differently. (not unlike a single hex code generating two
different characters on different operating systems) The sequence
colon-dash-X could be "Kiss" or "Biting tongue", and "Halo Angel" has been
seen as O-colon-closeparen and openparen-A-closeparen. [that is :-X O:)
and (A) respectively]
I was thinking more that this would allow modern software to translate a
lower-ASCII three-character sequence into a single unicode emoticon
character that would be displayed properly regardless of OS and software,
also alleviating the need for such developers to create proprietary artwork
for each. This multiple-keystroke-per-character input method does have
precedent with Asian languages.
> If you replace the multi-character form, then you will break old software
> without much benefit.
Can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. I'm sure Unicode as it is now
wreaks havoc on DOS apps :) ...but point taken.
> PS: ... and at the end of the day, Unicode is a _text_ encoding standard ...
> :-)
True enough. But sometimes text without inflection can be a dangerous
thing. This is what emoticons can address. Besides, Dingbats and
Miscellaneous Symbols aren't exactly textual. ...and if you can show me a
document written with the Box Drawing block, I'd be impressed. :)
With all due respect,
--Harry
