51–56 of 56 posts
Emojis are a plot to make English-speaking developers care about fixing their code to work with Unicode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe all Asian scripts was not planned to be included back then? Seems strange they would miscount so grossly otherwise.
It's all down to CJK. Originally they allocated 21k codepoints to CJK, and if that was accurate then 16 bits would pretty much fit things. But we currently have 88k CJK characters assigned out of possibly more than 100k total. I can't easily find anything about how this went wrong and they got such a small number.
If you also count the Unihan variations registered in Unicode's ideographic variation database by various Japanese outfits, encoded using the VS16 to VS255 characters after the codepoint they modify, there's another 8k or 9k unique characters assigned.
It is a shame that the majority of these won't been seen by common devices. Google has stopped work on their Noto fonts initiative, and modern versions of Android are stuck with pre Unicode 10. Apple has been pretty good at adding Emoji on iOS, but macOS seems to be left behind. As for Linux... Installing the Unifont gives coverage, but most distros don't seem to have a way to update base level fonts. I'd love to be…
:-( This may be my favorite Google project ever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not triviality. How many people do you really think care about Elymaic script? Or about Nandinagari?
Presumably some people. Assigning code points is the Unicode consortium’s job. That’s what unicode does . Nobody should be upset that they keep doing it. But you ignore the substance of the parent’s post which is about the new elements of the Unicode standard which are not confined to assigning code points. There is substance there to be analyzed - there is material there about how Unicode should be used in defining…
Why not?
Something being "somebody's job", and others being upset that that somebody keeps doing it, can be very logical. E.g.
1) if the job wastes resources, is deemed silly, is done badly, etc.
2) if the job is detrimental to those others
It is a shame that the majority of these won't been seen by common devices. Google has stopped work on their Noto fonts initiative, and modern versions of Android are stuck with pre Unicode 10. Apple has been pretty good at adding Emoji on iOS, but macOS seems to be left behind. As for Linux... Installing the Unifont gives coverage, but most distros don't seem to have a way to update base level fonts. I'd love to be…
I'd be surprised is there was more than a "between iOS/macOS major versions" discrepancy of their emojis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More specifically, scripts and glyphs that have documented and valid use cases. If you made up a script today, you would have to start using it first (and gain acceptance of it in some community) before it would be eligible for inclusion in the Unicode standard. A good example is the power symbol (⏻, Unicode 9.0). The proposal for it neatly documented that it was in wide use already — in manuals in particular. Emoji…
They used to be included because the Japanese had them in their encoding systems, but the situation now is far more fuzzy. Which is odd for a standard.
It's basically: "text/social comment/chat apps are big, let's add more BS icons for our Facebook/Apple/Google/MS/etc chat apps"