WJGO >>Yet if QID emoji are implemented by Unicode Inc. without also
being implemented by ISO/IEC 10646 then that could lead to future
problems, ...
Peter Constable wrote as follows.
Neither Unicode Inc. or ISO/IEC 10646 would _implement_ QID emoji.
That is correct. I should have made clear that I was referring to the
specification for QID emoji rather than QID emoji. How quite to express
precisely and concisely the formal acceptance of the specification by
Unicode Inc. to become a published Unicode Inc. document giving the
go-ahead for implementation by anyone (not just software vendors) is
somewhat difficult without using the word 'implement'.
Peter within his post also wrote as follows.
The PRI doc mentions the possibility of a registry for QID sequences;
a key benefit of a registry is that it may mitigate against these
non-interop risks. But the current proposal does not in fact provide
any mitigations for these issues other than the possibility that a QID
sequence might be at some point become an RGI sequence.
I put forward on Friday 8 November 2019 a suggestion that might help
towards solving the problem.
https://www.unicode.org/review/pri408/
William Overington
Tuesday 12 November 2019
