On 1/9/2012 2:40 PM, Doug Ewell wrote:
Asmus,
I think I see your point. Certainly I didn't intend to take the
experience of encoding the emoji characters and promote it as some sort
of preferred path for getting characters encoded in Unicode. Far from
it.
Rather, I was trying to describe the use case for the emoji symbols:
someone (the Japanese telcos) had made them available for use in the
context of plain-text, and a seemingly large population had actually
used them that way. Whether they were actually *implemented* as
plain-text characters (in the PUA of Shift-JIS), or as some sort of
inline images, is not the point.
I think the case would need to be made, as is usually necessary for
either formal or informal character proposals, that there is actually a
non-trivial population that wants or needs to use the proposed
"character" as plain text.
Thank you Doug. That summary captures it very nicely, especially your
last paragraph.
A./
