251–260 of 429 posts
I'm a bit confused about Unicode. It was a repository of linguistic symbols, not raw symbols. More and more it looks like wingdings. Isn't this putting burden on font support and Text processing (what's the lexicographic order of such symbols, using the abstract name ?) ?
The success of the unicodepowersymbol proposal inspired me to suggest a couple characters to Unicode (the Bitcoin sign and IBM's group mark from 1960s mainframes, which were accepted). The point is that Unicode really is open to proposals from random people; you don't need to part of a big company to influence Unicode.
Although I had never worked with the Unicode Consortium, I [submitted a proposal][1] for an international symbol for an observer and it was eventually accepted.
[1]: http://hypertexthero.com/logbook/2015/01/international-symbo...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unicode is supposed to include symbols that appear in "running text", not standalone icons. So no on traffic signs for instance. (There are exceptions for historical reasons. And emoji are a totally separate story.)
I have never read a book that had a snowman in the running text, so what's the story for emoji?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unicode is supposed to include symbols that appear in "running text", not standalone icons. So no on traffic signs for instance. (There are exceptions for historical reasons. And emoji are a totally separate story.)
I have never read a book that had a snowman in the running text, so what's the story for emoji?
They are mostly in Unicode for use in SMS, but there are plenty of use cases in other forms of text.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unicode is supposed to include symbols that appear in "running text", not standalone icons. So no on traffic signs for instance. (There are exceptions for historical reasons. And emoji are a totally separate story.)
I have never read a book that had a snowman in the running text, so what's the story for emoji?
I'm a bit confused about Unicode. It was a repository of linguistic symbols, not raw symbols. More and more it looks like wingdings. Isn't this putting burden on font support and Text processing (what's the lexicographic order of such symbols, using the abstract name ?) ?
They want every symbol used in a document to have a unique encoding, so that you can change fonts without losing meaning. Fonts like wingdings are a horrible hack. The idea is one (complex) encoding that will represent the info until the end of time. It creates a lot of trouble, but it's still a good idea.
The standards are not applied consistently. Even leaving emoji out of it, the chinese "character" 囍 never occurs in running text, but there it is in unicode.
I'm a bit confused about Unicode. It was a repository of linguistic symbols, not raw symbols. More and more it looks like wingdings. Isn't this putting burden on font support and Text processing (what's the lexicographic order of such symbols, using the abstract name ?) ?
I'm a bit confused about Unicode. It was a repository of linguistic symbols, not raw symbols. More and more it looks like wingdings. Isn't this putting burden on font support and Text processing (what's the lexicographic order of such symbols, using the abstract name ?) ?
The difference between an icon and a letter is small and unclear. & is a symbol but was considered a letter as an example. Chinese characters are words etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unicode 9.0 adds 7500 characters, 72 of which are emoji, so I think the "Emojigeddon" is a bit exaggerated.
Sounds like 72 too many if you ask me. In all seriousness, I'm not sure emoji's really belong in text encoding. Even though it's more convenient, based on where they're most frequently used I don't think they need to be universal.
I'm a bit confused about Unicode. It was a repository of linguistic symbols, not raw symbols. More and more it looks like wingdings. Isn't this putting burden on font support and Text processing (what's the lexicographic order of such symbols, using the abstract name ?) ?
In this case, the codepoints were added in part because the proposers could show many printed works (user manuals, I guess) that included sentences such as "to turn the foobar on, press the ■ button", which shows that the glyph between "the" and "button" is in some way like the surrounding glyphs. Chessmen were added for similar reasons, even though very few people actually read either user manuals or chess literature.