Re: PRI #299 (was: Re: Adding RAINBOW FLAG to Unicode)

[Asmus Freytag (t)]

On 7/3/2015 12:50 PM, Doug Ewell wrote: Leo Broukhis <leob at mailcom dot com> wrote: What I don't like about PRI #399 is its proposing to use default- ignorable characters. On a non-vexillology-aware platform, I'd like to see something informative, albeit not resembling a flag, but indicative of the intention to display a flag, like RIS can be, as opposed to nondescript white flags. This is just a personal prediction, but I'd guess that once the PRI #299 mechanism hits the streets, U+1F3F3 WAVING WHITE FLAG will be used overwhelmingly for tag sequences and comparatively seldom on its own. When a reader sees 🏳, it might be relatively safe to assume the writer intended to display a specific flag. I don't know what the original impetus for adding U+1F3F3 was. That might help us predict how popular U+1F3F3 will be on its own. Maybe one of the Emoji Gurus can help out here. My concern is that there are good reasons to have more than just a rectangular static "flag" plan image. There are triangular flags as well, and a flag that's drawn to be flying gives a different "festive" or "dynamic" image than a static one. In my view, the choice of a single base character is what makes the proposal unnecessarily limited. A new "WHITE FLAG" should be added, that is not "WAVING" to serve as the canonical base character, leaving any other flag shapes as base characters for flags of that shape. A./