Re: New Unicode Emoji draft, available for review

[Shervin Afshar]

>
> I forwarded this on, and the only response I got was a question regarding
> if the Fitzpatrick modifiers applied to U+1F4A9?  I answered that they only
> apply to specified emoji.  But I wonder if the question was in fact a
> commentary on what they think of the proposal.
>

Oh...I think that question is already answered by another emoji which -
unlike 1F4A9  - is actually fitz-optional[1].

[1]:
http://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/1.0/emoji-annotations.html#fitz-optional


↪ Shervin

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Karl Williamson 
wrote:

> On 11/03/2014 08:17 PM, announceme...@unicode.org wrote:
>
>> egg hatching emoji The Unicode Consortium has released the draft
>> “Unicode Emoji ”
>> document, whose main goal is to help improve the interoperability of
>> emoji characters across implementations by providing guidelines and data.
>>
>> This draft document also includes a section on Diversity, with a
>> mechanism using 5 new proposed characters to provide a variety of skin
>> tones for existing emoji characters.
>>
>> tr51 table 2-2
>>
>> The document is in “Proposed Draft” state, and made available for public
>> review and comment.
>>
>> http://unicode-inc.blogspot.com/2014/11/new-unicode-emoji-
>> draft-available-for.html
>>
>>
>
> I forwarded this on, and the only response I got was a question regarding
> if the Fitzpatrick modifiers applied to U+1F4A9?  I answered that they only
> apply to specified emoji.  But I wonder if the question was in fact a
> commentary on what they think of the proposal.
> ___
> Unicode mailing list
> Unicode@unicode.org
> http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>
___
Unicode mailing list
Unicode@unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode

Re: New Unicode Emoji draft, available for review

[Rick McGowan]

FYI, Posting this on behalf of Mark Davis... Something in his original 
reply message is apparently toxic to our mail gateway that it can't get 
through. (Investigating.)


May be the literal U+1F4A9, which I have (I'm sorry) redacted below.

Rick



> Could be either one [U+1F4A9]
>
> The exact contents of minimal and optional characters is something 
that we

> want to get feedback on. But I don't think [U+1F4A9] is in the running!
>
> BTW, I'm seeing about 250 new news articles on this, per hour (in 
English).

> https://www.google.com/search?q=emoji+unicode&tbm=nws&tbs=qdr:h
>
> Plus a scattering of others, s.a.
> 
http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/unicode-consortium-emojis-demnaechst-fuer-alle-hautfarben-a-1001125.html










___
Unicode mailing list
Unicode@unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode

Re: New Unicode Emoji draft, available for review

[Karl Williamson]

On 11/03/2014 08:17 PM, announceme...@unicode.org wrote:

egg hatching emoji The Unicode Consortium has released the draft
“Unicode Emoji ”
document, whose main goal is to help improve the interoperability of
emoji characters across implementations by providing guidelines and data.

This draft document also includes a section on Diversity, with a
mechanism using 5 new proposed characters to provide a variety of skin
tones for existing emoji characters.

tr51 table 2-2

The document is in “Proposed Draft” state, and made available for public
review and comment.

http://unicode-inc.blogspot.com/2014/11/new-unicode-emoji-draft-available-for.html




I forwarded this on, and the only response I got was a question 
regarding if the Fitzpatrick modifiers applied to U+1F4A9?  I answered 
that they only apply to specified emoji.  But I wonder if the question 
was in fact a commentary on what they think of the proposal.

___
Unicode mailing list
Unicode@unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode