>Unambiguously, Apple has failed to meet these technical guidelines, >in a blatant and unapologetic manner, and that’s why I liked the blobs — >they bucked norms, refused to conform to trends, and made emoji more >friendly to people who didn’t want to attach a gender to their every >expression. I think that’s valuable and I’m sad to see it go.
At least someone realised it was a (half) joke. This is my real issue, Apple disregards guidelines, sets a de facto standard, Google races to copy them. It's actually sad to see how far other vendors will go to copy Apple's designs. I honestly think the consortium should try harder to enforce the guidelines instead of letting Apple be the ruler and expecting others to obey. On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:07 AM, Rebecca T <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, you’re certainly not alone in your distaste for the new design. > @eevee > just today said “cool how we improved gender diversity by slowly changing > <https://twitter.com/eevee/status/865110401192648705> > from ‘ambiguous/neutral’ to ‘explicit color-coded binary, default usually > <https://twitter.com/eevee/status/865110401192648705> > male’” <https://twitter.com/eevee/status/865110401192648705> > > On the other hand, quoting @zaccolley: “if you treat emoji like pictures: > <https://twitter.com/zaccolley/status/865114030771507200> > yay blobs, if you treat emoji like language: yay consistency” > <https://twitter.com/zaccolley/status/865114030771507200> > > Ultimately, the new emoji designs will make our digital communication less > ambiguous — I’m just not sure if that’s a good change or not, and I > certainly don’t enjoy Apple being the default (on principle and for their > designs specifically). > > Quoting UTR #51: “General-purpose emoji for people and body parts should > also not be given overly specific images: the general recommendation is to > be as neutral as possible regarding race, ethnicity, and gender.” > > Unambiguously, Apple has failed to meet these technical guidelines, > in a blatant and unapologetic manner, and that’s why I liked the blobs — > they bucked norms, refused to conform to trends, and made emoji more > friendly to people who didn’t want to attach a gender to their every > expression. I think that’s valuable and I’m sad to see it go. > > And a serious response to this joke letter: Given that Google pays $18,000 > / > annum to vote on new emoji, it seems unlikely that the Consortium will just > kick them out. > > > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:40 AM, zelpa via Unicode <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> http://blog.emojipedia.org/rip-blobs-google-redesigns-emojis/ >> >> Is this some kind of joke? Have Google put ANY thought into their emoji >> design? First they bastardise the cute blob emoji, then they make their >> emoji gendered, now they've literally just copied Apple's emoji. It's >> sickening. Disgusting. I propose we hold a petition for the Unicode >> Consortium to ban Google from designing emoji in the future, and make them >> revert back to the Android 5 designs. Everyone in favour of this please >> leave a response, anybody not in favour please rethink your opinion. >> > >
