Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Unicode 13.0

unicode.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–96 of 96 posts

Re: Unicode 13.0

#91

Post by ksec »

ken wrote: post #83
robjan wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the perspective of a person who uses an alphabetical language, such as English, sure Unicode can be "done". But if your language is based on ideograms, like Chinese, then it'll never be "done". As words are created they need to be encoded.

Again, that's great and I understand that (I've studied Japanese), but that's only part of the new version. They're not adding pictures of "mousetrap" and "olives" and "toilet plunger" because any existing language needs to write these. Furthermore, I'm really starting to question the way CJK is encoded. We don't make every English word a separate codepoint. 97% of these CJK ideographs are just different combinations…

It is, I do not like the way CJK is being doubt with. Not to mention fonts dont include All the CJK variants of the fonts when I use the same word but need a JK variant because that is how it was suppose to be used.

Even the "C" has traditional and simplified variant.

Fortunately I think Unicode is pretty much done for Alphabetical languages. Someday if CJK design Unicode isn't good enough breaking it off to something better isn't entire impossible.

Re: Unicode 13.0

#92

Post by Someone »

klodolph wrote: post #33
pilif wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

either that or when there are 2^24 used codepoints.

The available space is closer to 2^20 (0-10FFFF, minus surrogate pairs, depending on whether you are talking about Unicode scalar values or code points).

There’s also Emoji modifiers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscellaneous_Symbols_and_Pict...) and regional indicators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_Indicator_Symbol that complicate determining the number of Unicode characters.

Re: Unicode 13.0

#93

Post by joveian »

2T1Qka0rEiPr wrote: post #90
jfk13 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although it depends on having the same level of emoji support across all the relevant systems/devices. If you send a message with Unicode 13 emoji to me and I read it on my phone that's stuck on Unicode 10, it's not much use. Whereas if these silly little images were represented by links to a canonical repository somewhere, newly-added images could automatically work even in pre-existing systems. On the other hand, t…

Yeh, so the current system seems better, because, although it's versioned, it doesn't need to constantly communicate with some central server. Also, another drawback is fonts need to be updated, but again, I think the benefits outweigh the costs.

Arguably it might be better to include a limited, space-optimized vector image format (something like HVIF, Haiku Vector Icon Format[0]) along with text rather than try to enumerate emoji, although there are also advantages to the current approach (smaller size for supported characters and meaning indpendent of representation). For the web there is already data: url and similar inline image options would be possible in many situations even without the basic text format including images.

[0] https://blog.leahhanson.us/post/recursecenter2016/haiku_icon...

Re: Unicode 13.0

#94

Post by samastur »

JdeBP wrote: post #58
samastur wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are probably joking, but I am seriously annoyed there's no donkey emoji.

Is U+130D8 not good enough for you?

Thanks, I wasn't aware of it. Sadly I get square when I try to use it so less reliable than emoji.

Re: Unicode 13.0

#95

Post by goto11 »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #52
goto11 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect emojis as characters will soon be replaced with graphics. Consumers are annoyed or confused when emojis look slightly different on different platforms.

Art is very sensitive to copyright, so unlimited sharing of graphic artwork is still quite an unusual idea.

Not really, clip art is nothing new. Copyright doesn't mean you can't share stuff. It just means the owner of the copyright decides if you can.

Re: Unicode 13.0

#96

Post by taejo »

publysher wrote: post #38
tasogare wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small precision for those who don't know the context: the Eszett (which comes from the ligature of 'ss') existed for centuries already in German writing. 2017 is just the date of its official integration in the alphabet, so it's not a 'new' letter created from scratch. I say that because I remember learning it at school a few decades ago (even if at the time we were warned the subject was touchy), and I was surprised…

And some more precision: this is about the uppercase Eszett. The lowercase variant has existed for ages, and before 2017 was officially uppercased into SS or SZ.

It still is officially capitalized to SS under normal circumstances; capital ẞ is an allowed alternative: "Bei Schreibung mit Großbuchstaben schreibt man SS. Daneben ist auch die Verwendung des Großbuchstabens ẞ möglich." (Deutsche Rechtschreibung § 25 E 3)

SZ hasn't officially been an option at least since 1996.

Post reply on HN