Peter Thank you very much for your informative response. I see that U+1F321 ➜ U+1F32C do not have Emoji_Presentation property set. Time for me to do some reading to determine why.
André On 29 Oct 2017, at 00:20, Peter Edberg <pedb...@unicode.org<mailto:pedb...@unicode.org>> wrote: This is about characters U+1F327,U+1F326 The variation selector FE0F is *not* unnecessary in with these. Looking at https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/5.0/emoji-data.txt those characters do *not* have the Emoji-Presentation property set, and they do have variation sequences defined. From https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Emoji_Variation_Selector_Notes, such singleton emoji characters “should have emoji presentation selectors on base characters with Emoji_Presentation=No whenever an emoji presentation is desired” - Peter E On Oct 28, 2017, at 4:11 AM, Andre Schappo via Unicode <unicode@unicode.org<mailto:unicode@unicode.org>> wrote: I am working on a Blog Article ( https://schappo.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/computer-science-internationalization.html ) and do not currently have access to OSX High Sierra, I am using OSX Sierra. I would appreciate some help from someone using OSX High Sierra. Using Sierra's Chinese Simplified Input Method the Emoji 🌧️ and 🌦️ have an unnecessary U+FE0F variation selector appended. The other Emoji I have tested with Sierra's Chinese Simplified Input Method do not have the variation selector appended. Could someone please check if the same happens with High Sierra Thank you André 🌏 🌍 🌎 André Schappo https://schappo.blogspot.co.uk<https://schappo.blogspot.co.uk/> https://twitter.com/andreschappo https://weibo.com/andreschappo https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/computer-science-curriculum-internationalization
