On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:14:31 +0000 David Starner <prosfilaes_at_gmail.com <prosfilaes_at_gmail.com?Subject=Re:%20Emoji%20end%20goal>> wrote: > Because the vendors want it.
I wouldn't say so in general. Emoji fonts are far more work than regular black-and-white vectors and I honestly believe that vendors with PNG-based fonts like Apple and Google are slowly reaching the point where they can no longer reasonably support any more emoji because their font sizes would just blow up. I have noticed that recently vendors have become quite picky on what emoji they want to support, going so far as blocking the addition of new symbol characters to the UCS entirely, rather than just refusing to give them emoji presentation once added. (Why they still thought the hundreds of new gendered emoji were a good idea is another question.) It's not like back in Unicode 7 when Apple and friends happily added half of Webdings to their colorful emoji fonts for no apparent reason. I think vendors really don't want to spend their time and effort on emoji anymore. Things like hair colors are pretty much unfeasible for anyone besides Microsoft, but as soon as there is some kind of semi-official Unicode mechanism for that, user will *demand* you to follow through and implement all possible variants.
