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

Rejected emoji proposals

charlottebuff.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 151 posts

Re: Rejected emoji proposals

#111

Post by 411111111111111 »

go_elmo wrote: post #110
mijamo wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got one love emojis and think it was one of the best decisions to include them in Unicode. I don't buy that you can have tens of thousands of weird human scripts but then a few icons representing non verbal communication is suddenly "too much". Sure a system might not support everything but the same is true for the regular text scripts. And then it means I can include emojis in my she'll script, slack messages, cop…

My problem with emojis is finding them. No, I dont want to search hundrets of tiny images for making a point. No, I dont want to learn another alphabet with thousands of symbols. Just _write_ is so much easier. Or link it with a unicode name to be able to refer to it without searching

Uh, just use the picker which has search buld-in?

Windows+. On windows

OSX was something like ctrl-space or something. I rarely chat on Mac so I don't recall.

Re: Rejected emoji proposals

#112

Post by insomagent »

mouse_ wrote: post #67
NayamAmarshe wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not on Telegram and Discord. They have custom emojis.

Discord handles emojis better than any other chat platform I've used; I think this is one of the main reasons people like to use it. Telegram's up there with Skype for being one of the absolute worst at handling them. I type :flushed: and it gives me smiling blushing face instead of :flushed:. I type :o (which has always meant surprised pikachu face, since before the surprised pikachu face was even a meme) and it giv…

It's also a genius monetization strategy, having something as superficial as custom emoji being one of the main value propositions of Discord Nitro.

Re: Rejected emoji proposals

#115

Post by lozenge »

Aerroon wrote: post #109
mijamo wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got one love emojis and think it was one of the best decisions to include them in Unicode. I don't buy that you can have tens of thousands of weird human scripts but then a few icons representing non verbal communication is suddenly "too much". Sure a system might not support everything but the same is true for the regular text scripts. And then it means I can include emojis in my she'll script, slack messages, cop…

The problem is that the emojis appear different in different applications/devices. They're different enough that it can change the meaning of what you see, which means that people end up using it in an application-specific way. But we already had application specific emoticons. They worked well, they work so well, that even with emojis in Unicode we still use application specific ones instead. Also, the default ones…

Except... they're application specific. So, no ability to copy and paste, no way to send SMS to one person then iMessage to another then WhatsApp. Every app having a different keyboard with different icons in a different order. And what about websites? Multiple apps showing tweets? Emails?

Re: Rejected emoji proposals

#116

Post by slig »

joshspankit wrote: post #57
donatj wrote: post #55

I feel like the entire emoji block should be made part of the supplementary/private use or similar. Leave what gets implemented up to Microsoft/ Apple/ Google to agree on. It's fallen completely out of scope of unicode's purpose of documenting used symbols and into a sort of editorialized control of what can cannot be said.

And also in to a way for companies to encourage users to upgrade their OS

Exactly. There's no reason for a font to be tied to a specific OS version.

Re: Rejected emoji proposals

#118

Post by matthewmacleod »

toastal wrote: post #85

I like that they have stopped accepting flag proposals. They don't have any business trying to play geopolitics and they don't want to either, but as a result these legacy symbol must stay there for compatibility and new nations or those that didn't make the cut get no representation. We should use these flags a lot less anyhow— especially for language indicators.

To clarify, new national flags will still be added to the standard in line with changes to ISO 3166. So new countries will (as I understand it) still receive flags. This seems like a reasonable compromise, though it’s not without its risks either.

But I agree generally that the addition of flags was, in retrospect, an unfortunate outcome.

Re: Rejected emoji proposals

#119

Post by squokko »

muzani wrote: post #74
bXVsbGVy wrote: post #6

I find fascinating that many of those were rejected, but "Pregnant man" and male bride were approved. https://emojipedia.org/pregnant-man/ https://emojiguide.com/people-body/man-with-veil/

"It is time for the UTC to own up to their mistakes. This whole ordeal has gone on for way too long. I am not asking for much; the solution to this problem is laughably easy. The current gender situation in Unicode is discriminatory, end of discussion. It excludes transgender people by pretending that only women can get pregnant. It excludes non-binary people by treating the third gender option as secondary to male a…

Poe’s Law

Re: Rejected emoji proposals

#120

Post by KORraN »

gardenhedge wrote: post #29

It sucks that emojis everywhere are all the same. I miss the old days.

To be honest, I'm happy with the standardization of emoji. I remember cases where I sent an emoji, but the other person saw one that was expressing a different emotion or it was hard to understand what I was trying to convey.
Post reply on HN