The selection criteria for emoji are unlike those of other characters, because their primary usage is different. If there is a particular set of emoji characters that you would like to propose, see information at http://unicode.org/emoji/selection.html for how to do so, and what the selection factors are.
There is a link to that page at the top of most of the charts, such as http://unicode.org/emoji/charts-beta/full-emoji-list.html. Is there a way we can make that link more prominent, so that readers like you will notice it more easily? Mark Mark On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Christoph Päper < [email protected]> wrote: > Are in-line pictures in reading instruction books, standing in mostly for > nouns, considered supporting proof of existing use of proposed symbols or > emojis? > > I recently realized, reading a children’s book to/with my sons, that a lot > of the pictograms – I estimated 80% in my sample – could actually be > represented reasonably well by existing emojis. Most of the ones that were > missing were either very specific to the story (like the *🗼 ‘tower’ of a > 🏰 and the *🎱 ‘cannon ball’ attached to the ⛓ of a 👻) or were closely > related to the everyday life of a European toddler (e.g. a tricycle and a > bike helmet). The glyphs are usually individual and specific to each book, > especially if there are also full-page pictures in it, but I wouldn’t be > the least surprised if a study found that the things – and it’s mostly > things indeed – depicted in such books from different authors, publishers > and languages came from a quite limited common vocabulary (for the most > frequent parts at least). Different readings of the same pictogram, e.g > ‘truck’ vs. ‘lorry’ for 🚛, are usually not a problem in this applicati! > on. > > Has such research been conducted and been presented to the UTC already? >
