That's what Mr. Overington wants, but he's not the original proposer. The proposal by Hiroyuki Komatsu <http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2015/15197r-emoji-food-allergens.pdf> does not say anything of the sort, and by unifying some with existing characters implies otherwise.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:26 PM, gfb hjjhjh <[email protected]> wrote: > As according to http://unicode.org/faq/emoji_dingbats.html , emoji > characters do not have single semantics. Which I think it is not what the > original proposer want? Or were I misunderstanding that > > 2015年7月29日 上午3:28於 "Doug Ewell" <[email protected]>寫道： >> >> gfb hjjhjh <c933103 at gmail dot com> wrote: >> >> > Probably if these symbols are to be added to unicode, it would better >> > to allocate blocks that are not belong to emoji for them. >> >> I'm curious what this is supposed to accomplish. It's not as though >> people viewing such a symbol on a screen or in print, or entering it on >> a phone keypad, will know or care what its Unicode code point is, or >> what other types of symbols have nearby code points. >> >> The Miscellaneous Symbols block contains U+2620 SKULL AND CROSSBONES, >> U+2623 BIOHAZARD SIGN, and U+263A WHITE SMILING FACE. >> >> -- >> Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸 >> >> >
