Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
blog.unicode.org
Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
1–10 of 56 posts
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#2I wonder what fringe diversity group has gotten their new custom emojis accepted this time.
Does Unicode care about actual languages any more?
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#3I wonder what fringe diversity group has gotten their new custom emojis accepted this time. Does Unicode care about actual languages any more?
It's about half-way into the post that it talks about emoji and not actual languages, so the answer is pretty obviously yes.
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#4I wonder what fringe diversity group has gotten their new custom emojis accepted this time. Does Unicode care about actual languages any more?
Given this release adds several new scripts, which actual languages do you think they don't care enough about? (+ of course there being several groups of people involved, so it's not an either/or thing)
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#5I wonder what fringe diversity group has gotten their new custom emojis accepted this time. Does Unicode care about actual languages any more?
Well, as the linked post says in the first paragraph, almost 90% of the 554 new characters aren’t emoji, and include four new scripts (used by several different languages) and additions for several other scripts. Emoji are only mentioned once in the first half of the article, and unless you consider accessibility-related emoji to be only for a “fringe diversity group”, I’m not sure how the newly added emoji [0] could be particularly controversial?
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#6I wonder what fringe diversity group has gotten their new custom emojis accepted this time. Does Unicode care about actual languages any more?
I actually went into this post fully expecting to make the same snarky comment, but upon actually reading the article, they added 554 characters and 4 new scripts, along with stuff like Egyptian hieroglyph formatting support, vs. 61 emojis. Which made the idea of snarking about how they only cared about emojis look rather silly.
Anyway, since you asked, the fringe diversity group getting the new custom emojis is disabled people (mainly hearing-impaired, vision-impaired, and wheelchair users). So, y'know, on the order of 10% of the population. Very fringe.
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#7It 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 proved wrong about any of this. But is seems that the majority of systems don't care because their native scripts are already supported.
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#8I wonder what fringe diversity group has gotten their new custom emojis accepted this time. Does Unicode care about actual languages any more?
The whole emoticon thing have became ridiculous. It's time for Unicode to split and let the kids playing with their images and to focus on more important, textual things. For example the cuneiform block is not detailed enough to be used by scholars.
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#9I wonder what fringe diversity group has gotten their new custom emojis accepted this time. Does Unicode care about actual languages any more?
The whole emoticon thing have became ridiculous. It's time for Unicode to split and let the kids playing with their images and to focus on more important, textual things. For example the cuneiform block is not detailed enough to be used by scholars.
Do you think that the committee approving new emojis is qualified to seamlessly transition into discussing the minutiae of cuneiform formatting? It may be a guess on my part, but I'm pretty confident that there are two different (and probably non-overlapping) sets of people working on these two areas.
Re: Unicode Standard, Version 12.0
#10It 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…
Apple has been pretty good at adding Emoji on iOS, but macOS seems to be left behind.
The latest macOS version gets emoji updates regularly; it stays in sync with the latest iOS.