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

Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

hecate.pink

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 111 posts

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#91

Post by F3nd0 »

SchemaLoad wrote: post #45
F3nd0 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Furries have an emoji?

Not a single dedicated, representative furry emoji that I'm aware of (unless we count 1F43E – paw prints), but there are a couple emoji which happen to be furry. In addition to the plethora of animal emoji (which aren't furry, but likely to be appreciated by furries), there are several emoji of cats with expressive faces (which do technically classify as furry), such as:

1F638 – grinning cat face with smiling eyes; 1F63B – smiling cat face with heart-shaped eyes; 1F63C – cat face with wry smile; 1F640 – weary cat face.

There was also the unofficial and very narrowly supported combination of ‘hacker cat’ and a few others:

https://emojipedia.org/hacker-cat

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#92

Post by thefz »

FireInsight wrote: post #81
thefz wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least this one isn't presented as a back and forth between two furry characters

Dialogue has been a form of presentation forever. (See, Plato and most of literature)

So Is illustration as shown by hieroglyphics, this doesn't make me want it more. I can understand text just fine

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#93

Post by JCattheATM »

prmoustache wrote: post #68
aizk wrote: post #17

You really need to add a toggle for the effects, it makes it hard to read.

[flagged]

Some I think just have an aversion to effects, not because it's hard to read, that is often just the excuse, but because they just don't like them.

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#94

Post by napkinartist »

prmoustache wrote: post #68
aizk wrote: post #17

You really need to add a toggle for the effects, it makes it hard to read.

[flagged]

I work in accessibility. I'm non binary and queer AF.

The particles are a problem for some sensory processing disorders that cannot tune out motion. This is why the prefer reduced motion attribute exists.

I appreciate that you and I probably agree that some people with anti-LGBTQ sentiments will pick on anything atypical about a website like this to claim some notional moral high ground to punch down, but in the case of the particles specifically there are disability accommodation reasons to consider them something toggleable.

(Though using reader mode is probably sufficient for those users, as the site is developed to support it well.)

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#95

Post by spoiler »

FireInsight wrote: post #81
thefz wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least this one isn't presented as a back and forth between two furry characters

Dialogue has been a form of presentation forever. (See, Plato and most of literature)

I don't mind the dialogue, but if we're taking about the same author, some of the content gets diminished by the meandering waffling.

I realise it's a stylistic choice but there's been a few posts where I felt tired after reading their articles. And it also feels like one of those YouTube shorts sketches where one person pretends to be multiple people and it starts feeling a bit cheap/meh.

I think it would be fine if it they toned down on the interjections/interruptions

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#96

Post by WorldMaker »

gmueckl wrote: post #69

As much as I appreciate the expressiveness that comes from emojis and flags in Unicode, I am rather shocked by the growing technical complexity of decoding unicode into rwndwrable graphemes. Unicode was already worryingly complex before all of these new combinations were introduced. Properly parsing Unicode is close to obtaining this "don't roll your own" status that has has so far been reserved for the likes of netw…

Rendering Unicode was always this complex. Emoji don't do anything that some other language in real use doesn't also do. What emoji does is bring that visually to the forefront among contemporary English text. The assumption that 8-bit character sets of simple bitmaps are all you need mostly only ever worked for English (and then only if you didn't need nice print-like typography, or math formulas, or…).

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#98

Post by gmueckl »

WorldMaker wrote: post #96
gmueckl wrote: post #69

As much as I appreciate the expressiveness that comes from emojis and flags in Unicode, I am rather shocked by the growing technical complexity of decoding unicode into rwndwrable graphemes. Unicode was already worryingly complex before all of these new combinations were introduced. Properly parsing Unicode is close to obtaining this "don't roll your own" status that has has so far been reserved for the likes of netw…

Rendering Unicode was always this complex. Emoji don't do anything that some other language in real use doesn't also do. What emoji does is bring that visually to the forefront among contemporary English text. The assumption that 8-bit character sets of simple bitmaps are all you need mostly only ever worked for English (and then only if you didn't need nice print-like typography, or math formulas, or…).

This isn't exactly true. Emojis and other symbols introduced new notions like colors that were not present before. I'm no longer certain that it is feasible to handcraft a font thwt contains all the symbols for codepoints affected by color modifiers.

Also, 8 bit codepages, for all their problems (a different kind of hell), didn't break the assumption that each character is encoded as one byte. In that way, they didn't break software in interesting ways like UTF-encoded and possibly decomposed Unicode is able to do. Back then, it was something of a blessing at surface level, but the proliferation of string handling code and concepts that assume this one to one mappping just don't fit well with Unicode. And UTF-8 specifically gives the illusion to English speakers that using naive 8 bit string handling works.

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#99

Post by dang »

octoberfranklin wrote: post #42
jrockway wrote: post #27

I like how the Unicode Consortium really doesn't want to accept any more flags, but you can still probably shoehorn them in if you're Apple or Google and you have a glyph sequence that is backwards compatible. One way of getting things done -- just do it. I knew the details behind this because Windows 10 didn't include font with the trans flag by default, and so it always rendered as flag + trans symbol. I eventually…

China really doesn't want to accept more flag emojis. For fairly obvious reasons.

"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Why the trans flag emoji is the 5-codepoint sequence it is

#100

Post by Rendello »

jrockway wrote: post #27

I like how the Unicode Consortium really doesn't want to accept any more flags, but you can still probably shoehorn them in if you're Apple or Google and you have a glyph sequence that is backwards compatible. One way of getting things done -- just do it. I knew the details behind this because Windows 10 didn't include font with the trans flag by default, and so it always rendered as flag + trans symbol. I eventually…

That's true, they won't process any proposals for flags anymore. The first link in the linked post is a detailed FAQ from the Unicode people:

> Flags for countries with Unicode region codes [ie. recognized by ISO] are automatically recommended, with no proposals necessary! [...] the Emoji Subcommittee is no longer taking in any proposals for flags of any kind.

They have a section addressing new pride flags specifically near the end of the FAQ.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44283231

Post reply on HN