Well, I think it’s definitely important to have representation and
expression for people of all skin tones and genders even in things like
I think we’re rapidly reaching a limit for variation sequences, and I’m
personally not begging for hair color modifiers (although I would welcome
I do worry a bit about the burden of supporting emoji on new systems.
Drawing thousands (not that anyone can even count how many emoji there are)
is a significant burden on developers creating new systems, and the
alternative (tofu) isn’t appealing. There is Symbola (which leaves
something to be desired, to say the least) and the graphical solutions,
like Apple’s image-based or Microsoft’s layered-vector approach, have
non-trivial implementations (stuff I wouldn’t want to take care of if I was
creating a new system).
I guess what I’m saying is: does anyone want to extent Unifont into the
On Wednesday, October 12, 2016, zelpa <zelp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So what exactly is the end goal for emoji? First we had the fitzpatrick
> skin modifiers, now there's the proposal for gendered emoji sequences using
> ZWJ. There was even the proposal for the hair colour modifier in TR 53. So
> what is the true end goal? Will we one day be able to display our Fallout 4
> character with a single emoji and 60 modifiers? And honestly, who is asking
> for these additions? Does anybody WANT a hair colour modifier? Seems to me
> like the consortium might just be pandering to a few silly requests (by
> people who have no actual idea what unicode is) to get media attention.