On 6 Apr 2017, at 13:19, Christoph Päper <christoph.pae...@crissov.de> wrote: > > Although Michael Everson readily dismisses any connection to emojis, e.g. > L2/16-021 or L2/16-087+088, and hence the Emoji and Emoji_Presentation > character properties as well as sequences with variation selectors 15 and 16 > (U+FE0E/F), normal emoji design actually matches "diagram" notation quite > nicely in that all emoji glyphs are rendered within an (ideographic / em) > square.
No, no. Emojis are something else very specific and very expensive with implications for vendors and having to do with colour. Look at zero: U+0030 - 0 - DIGIT ZERO U+0030 FE00 - 0︀ - short diagonal stroke form U+0030 FE0E - 0︎ - text style U+0030 FE0F - 0️ - emoji style Emoji is something else. Emoji is a fine thing, but it’s not chessboard typesetting. Michael Everson
