On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 09:54:59PM +0530, Shriramana Sharma via Unicode wrote: > On Thu 10 Jan, 2019, 20:49 Arthur Reutenauer via Unicode < > unicode@unicode.org wrote: > > > > > On this topic, I was just pointed to > > > > https://twitter.com/kentcdodds/status/1083073242330361856 > > > > โYou ๐ต๐ฉ๐ช๐ฏ๐ฌ it's ๐ธ๐๐โฏ to ๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ฒ your tweets and usernames > > ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐. But > > have you ๐ก๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐ to what it ๐ด๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฏ๐ฅ๐ด ๐ญ๐ช๐ฌ๐ฆ with assistive > > technologies > > like ๐ฅ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ป?โ > > > Something similar: > > https://twitter.com/aaronreynolds/status/1083098920132071424?s=20 > > "This is what itโs like to get texts from my fourteen year old while > driving." > > https://t.co/s8949bmgZI
That is pretty good actually and even a positive point for emoji (if these were mere images you would get nothing out of it without extra tagging, and it would still lack the standardization). Nothing like what one gets from the math symbols abuse. Regards, Khaled
