4 ms·

Last I checked, Unicode don't actually have anything like coverage of the entirety of every script and alphabet. On the other hand, approving emoji and random

Last I checked, Unicode don't actually have anything like coverage of the entirety of every script and alphabet. On the other hand, approving emoji and random icons delights Westerners.

macspoofing 10y ago
>Last I checked, Unicode don't actually have anything like coverage of the entirety of every script and alphabet Because the Unicode standards body doesn't want them in, or because those scripts don't have champions pushing for their inclusion? >On the other hand, approving emoji and random icons delights Westerners. Westerners? Notwithstanding the fact that emoji icons came from Japan, I'm fairly certain emotive icons are popular globally.
- Semiapies 10y ago
  Well, we know emoji has at least one champion, here.
acdha 10y ago
When was the last time you checked? See e.g. http://www.unicode.org/charts/ http://www.unicode.org/charts/ and especially http://unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html http://unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html – it's not everything in human history but what's left out are increasingly obscure.
- Semiapies 10y ago
  You don't have to point to human history, though that's a good source of missing scripts. Waving off scripts actually in use as "increasingly obscure", while cheering Unicode throwing in any icon random geeks pitch to them, misses the purpose of Unicode.
  - acdha 10y ago
    You're tossing that assertion around without supporting it – what commonly used characters are not in Unicode? How many people use them? Are they not in Unicode because nobody cares or because there is a lack of someone authoritative helping codify the list or contentious disagreements about some aspects of that work?
    - Semiapies 10y ago
      Seriously, you're able to Google up those other links, but you somehow can't find the (non-exhaustive) Unsupported Scripts list or the Proposed New Scripts pages on the Unicode site? And, without knowing the situation for any of them, you're going to throw out excuses for why the absences don't matter? These aren't characters, but entire scripts that are not part of the standard. Nor are major scripts like kanji complete. But, hey. Power button icon.
      - acdha 10y ago
        Again, you're the one making the claim. Can you precisely state what you believe to be the problem and cite some sources that this is a major problem and that nobody is working on it? More importantly, ask why it seems unreasonable that a small number of very widely-used ISO standard symbols were incorporated quickly? Wouldn't that be the most reasonable expectation since it lacks the political heat of e.g. Han unification and doesn't require any research or debate to establish that they are used, have a precise meaning, and are not covered by existing codepoints?
        Semiapies 10y ago
        I've already stated my complaint: that getting gratuitous icons into Unicode is easier than actual scripts for human languages. Since you're having Google issues, I'll link you to a page I already mentioned, which it self links to other relevant pages http://unicode.org/standard/unsupported.html http://unicode.org/standard/unsupported.html I love the echoing nature of these counter-arguments, that a problem doesn't even exist unless it's "major" and "nobody is working on it". I wonder how many actual different human beings have responded to me in this thread...
- xigency 10y ago
  This article has some examples - https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/i-can-text-you-a-pile-of-poo-but-i-cant-write-my-name https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/i-can-text-you-a-pile-of... There is also some discussion here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9219162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9219162 In this instance, someone is complaining that they cannot type their name on a computer.

Last I checked, Unicode don't actually have anything like coverage of the entirety of every script and alphabet. On the other hand, approving emoji and random icons delights Westerners.

macspoofing 10y ago

>Last I checked, Unicode don't actually have anything like coverage of the entirety of every script and alphabet Because the Unicode standards body doesn't want them in, or because those scripts don't have champions pushing for their inclusion? >On the other hand, approving emoji and random icons delights Westerners. Westerners? Notwithstanding the fact that emoji icons came from Japan, I'm fairly certain emotive icons are popular globally.

Semiapies 10y ago
Well, we know emoji has at least one champion, here.

acdha 10y ago

When was the last time you checked? See e.g. http://www.unicode.org/charts/ http://www.unicode.org/charts/ and especially http://unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html http://unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html – it's not everything in human history but what's left out are increasingly obscure.

Semiapies 10y ago
You don't have to point to human history, though that's a good source of missing scripts. Waving off scripts actually in use as "increasingly obscure", while cheering Unicode throwing in any icon random geeks pitch to them, misses the purpose of Unicode.
- acdha 10y ago
  You're tossing that assertion around without supporting it – what commonly used characters are not in Unicode? How many people use them? Are they not in Unicode because nobody cares or because there is a lack of someone authoritative helping codify the list or contentious disagreements about some aspects of that work?
  - Semiapies 10y ago
    Seriously, you're able to Google up those other links, but you somehow can't find the (non-exhaustive) Unsupported Scripts list or the Proposed New Scripts pages on the Unicode site? And, without knowing the situation for any of them, you're going to throw out excuses for why the absences don't matter? These aren't characters, but entire scripts that are not part of the standard. Nor are major scripts like kanji complete. But, hey. Power button icon.
    - acdha 10y ago
      Again, you're the one making the claim. Can you precisely state what you believe to be the problem and cite some sources that this is a major problem and that nobody is working on it? More importantly, ask why it seems unreasonable that a small number of very widely-used ISO standard symbols were incorporated quickly? Wouldn't that be the most reasonable expectation since it lacks the political heat of e.g. Han unification and doesn't require any research or debate to establish that they are used, have a precise meaning, and are not covered by existing codepoints?
      - Semiapies 10y ago
        I've already stated my complaint: that getting gratuitous icons into Unicode is easier than actual scripts for human languages. Since you're having Google issues, I'll link you to a page I already mentioned, which it self links to other relevant pages http://unicode.org/standard/unsupported.html http://unicode.org/standard/unsupported.html I love the echoing nature of these counter-arguments, that a problem doesn't even exist unless it's "major" and "nobody is working on it". I wonder how many actual different human beings have responded to me in this thread...
xigency 10y ago
This article has some examples - https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/i-can-text-you-a-pile-of-poo-but-i-cant-write-my-name https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/i-can-text-you-a-pile-of... There is also some discussion here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9219162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9219162 In this instance, someone is complaining that they cannot type their name on a computer.