Shervin Afshar <shervinafshar at gmail dot com> wrote: >> Of course not. But that's been a stated condition for labeling >> something as "compatibility." > > It *is* compatibility; go back and read my email where I mentioned > exactly where it was used.
You mean the one where you said that Gmail has had ROBOT FACE for a long time? You mean to say that any time Gmail or someone adds a private-use character or embeddable graphic for TOILET PAPER or TIRE IRON or BEER KEG, that Unicode is essentially obliged to add an emoji to maintain compatibility with it? Well, perhaps that's how it is now. But that isn't the way Unicode used to be. Fuddily-duddily, -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | http://ewellic.org _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
