On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:09:09 +0200, Christoph Päper wrote: > 1. If there’s any VS-16 or any character with `Emoji_Presentation=Yes` > in a ZWJ sequence, the whole sequence SHOULD be treated as emoji(s). > > 2. A ZWJ sequence SHOULD be treated as emoji(s) if it contains only > characters that either have `Emoji_Presentation=Yes` or whose glyph > *can* be affected by VS-16.
One fine thing about discussing emoji is that we arenʼt really meant to bother whether to append a plural s: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/01/whats-the-plural-of-emoji-emojis/422763/ [Please, read down until where the Consortium is cited.] http://blog.emojipedia.org/emojis-on-the-rise-as-plural/ Itʼs all about following the “tsunamis” or the “sushi” pattern. I believe the latter is more appropriate for emoji, as weʼre at ease acknowledging their birth country. Marcel
