>> Probably if these symbols are to be added to unicode, it would better to >> allocate blocks that are not belong to emoji for them.
> I'm curious what this is supposed to accomplish. It's not as though people > viewing such a symbol on a screen or in print, or entering it on a phone > keypad, will know or care what its Unicode code point is, or what other types > of symbols have nearby code points. Yet some people might be using a system with an Insert Symbol... facility to prepare an email or to design a label or whatever. In such Insert Symbol... facilities it is often the case that characters are listed in Unicode code point order. My original purpose of suggesting separate blocks of code points was to seek to avoid a symbol relating to a food allergen having more than one meaning, one precise and medical, one or more others just everyday chat. The issue of the meaning of an emoji character not being precisely defined that has been discussed in other posts in this thread makes having separate blocks and maybe not even terming the characters as emoji but as "precise emoji" or some other new term, become very important so as to avoid confusion in the application of the symbols. Also, suppose that a person programming an app wishes to have the software in the app notice whatever food allergen emoji characters are in a message. Having them all within two contiguous blocks of code points would assist the programming process. There was also a coding aesthetics aspect that separate blocks seems better to me as a way to organize such an encoding. William Overington 29 July 2015
