Re: New Public Review on QID emoji

[Asmus Freytag via Unicode]

On 11/12/2019 12:32 PM, wjgo_10...@btinternet.com via Unicode wrote: > Just because you can write something that is a very detailed specification doesn't mean that it is, or ever should be, a standard. Yes, but that does not mean that it should necessarily not become a standard. For communication to take place one needs to start somewhere. The QID emoji proposal is a start. It has been considered at (at least) two Unicode Technical Committee meetings and now there is a public review taking place. Just because a select group of people engages in communication about the arcane details of a proposed specification it doesn't mean that the outcome will benefit some entirely different and larger group communicate better. There's too much of the "might possibly" about this; and it is quite different from the early days of Unicode itself, where there was a groundswell of pent-up demand for a solution to the fragmented character encoding landscape; the discussions quickly became about the best way to do that, and about how to ensure that the result would be supported. The current effort starts from an unrelated problem (Unicode not wanting to administer emoji applications) and in my analysis, seriously puts the cart before the horse. A./