Mark Davis ☕️ <[email protected]>: > > Given the status of WAP, I don't think there is any particular need to seek > compatibility for it.
Much of WAP/WML is deprecated by recent OMA specs, but Pictogram is still an (optional) part of Browsing V2.4 from 2011 – or more specifically: Mobile Application Environment Specification (MAE). <http://www.oma-works.org/Technical/release_program/docs/Browsing/V2_4-20110329-A/OMA-TS-MAESpec-V2_4-20110329-A.pdf> Nevertheless, I think it’s OMA’s job – not the UTC’s – to seek a smooth transition of their standards to state-of-the-art technology. > On the other hand, it — like other sources — can certainly be mined for ideas. Indeed, but some sources one could mine will leave one in confusion: There have been several characters in drafts over the past ten or so years that seem to absolutely make sense, but haven’t made it for reasons mostly opaque to the public, e.g. Kangaroo in L2/09-114 = N3607. (This one, I think, was dismissed back then because it wasn’t part of the original Japanese sets nor W—dings, but it’s not clear why it didn’t reappear since, when other new animals have been added.) <https://github.com/Crissov/unicode-proposals/issues/106> > For example, the topic of SCUBA has certainly come up, and I suspect one > could make a good case for the expected frequency being similar to some other > sports. Would it be a profession (Diver), an activity (Diving) or an object (Mask, Snorkel, Tanks, Finns, …) though? This is easy to get wrong: the gender-aware Mage emoji coming to Unicode 10, for instance, is probably less useful than a Magic Wand (which is a common icon in image editors and thus became part of graphic artist jargon) or a generic Magic emoji (arguably covered by Sparkles ✨ already). <https://github.com/Crissov/unicode-proposals/issues/179>
