> > There is no longer any requirement that the robot faces and > burritos appear first in any sort of industry character set extension, > with which Unicode is then obliged to maintain compatibility.
Only if you don't consider existing usage and popular requests as requirement and precedence; for example Gmail had Robot Face for a long time. ↪ Shervin On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Doug Ewell <d...@ewellic.org> wrote: > Frédéric Grosshans <frederic dot grosshans at gmail dot com> wrote: > > > The including of emoji was a considerable debate here, with people > > strongly against and strongly for. The trick is that they were already > > used as digital characters by Japanese Telcos and their millions of > > customers. They were de facto encoded as characters in Japanese text > > messages. At the time of encoding, the spread of smartphones made them > > appear in other places (emails, web forums, etc.) > > Sorry, I can't let the "compatibility" argument go unchallenged again. > > It can be argued — and was, repeatedly and persuasively — that the > initial collection of emoji in Unicode 6.1 [1] were added for > compatibility with Japanese telco extensions to JIS. > > But the additional emoji added to Unicode 6.2 and 7.0, and planned for > 8.0, do not have even this provenance; they were added on foot of novel > proposals sent directly to Unicode, or (more recently) by "popular > request." There is no longer any requirement that the robot faces and > burritos appear first in any sort of industry character set extension, > with which Unicode is then obliged to maintain compatibility. > > [1] No, I am not counting the ARIB symbols or any other long-encoded > symbols that have been retroactively defined as emoji, to help > legitimize the latter. > > Alfred Zett <alfred underscore z at web dot de) replied: > > > The trick is that one doesn't bargain with Telcos and similar > > criminals. Gotta drop them hard and the pest will go away from itself > > after five years or so. > > This does not help to make a case for or against encoding of anything. > > -- > Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | http://ewellic.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Unicode mailing list > Unicode@unicode.org > http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode >
_______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode@unicode.org http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode