4 ms·

You could actually propose a whole set of Unicode characters that are making realistic-for-lip-reading movements.

by evanb 9y ago

orbital-decay 9y ago
That would be a rabbit hole though, if you consider that Unicode isn't English or even Indo-European centric. *(just another rabbit hole actually, Unicode got plenty of them already)
- evanb 9y ago
  No reason not to have one for each IPA character.
- scrollaway 9y ago
  The entire IPA is available in unicode. You could treat those as ligatures with a special combinator character, which would work a lot like flags, skintones etc work. eg: [special begin character] + NEUTRAL FACE (U+1F610) + [IPA characters] + (special end character) = talking face! hurray! "text engine developers hate him"
  - frik 9y ago
    Jesus man, have some respect for other humans, and some leniency where it's warranted.
- chrisseaton 9y ago
  > Unicode isn't English or even Indo-European centric It definitely is! The Latin alphabet gets a special place at the start of the range, in order to be compatible with ASCII, an English-language character set.
  - throwanem 9y ago
    That doesn't say Unicode is English-centric. That just says it sought backwards compatibility with a then-dominant character set that was. Seeing as otherwise Unicode would likely have been regarded as a pointless exercise in ocean-boiling in many more quarters than it initially was, and would have faced a commensurately steeper slope to reach wide adoption, I'm not sure what better alternative you see the initial designers having forgone to choose as they did.
    - chrisseaton 9y ago
      > I'm not sure what better alternative you see the initial designers having forgone to choose as they did I didn't criticise it, did I? I just pointed it out. So I don't need to see any better alternative. But I don't follow your argument - it's not English centric because they were only bending over backwards to make sure that the English-speaking world accepted it by designing it around them?
      - throwanem 9y ago
        Rather, because they chose to design it such that those regions of the world already not burdened with ugly character-set compatibility hacks (code pages! retch) would continue not to be so burdened, so as to ease adoption there and make it more likely they'd succeed in relieving everyone else of the compatibility hack burden. I'm not sure why it matters which regions those were.
tzahola 9y ago
Unicode is already a joke with arbitrary emojis added every other week without discipline...
- evanb 9y ago
  https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/person-lotus-position/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/person-lotus-position...

You could actually propose a whole set of Unicode characters that are making realistic-for-lip-reading movements.

by evanb 9y ago

You could actually propose a whole set of Unicode characters that are making realistic-for-lip-reading movements.

That would be a rabbit hole though, if you consider that Unicode isn't English or even Indo-European centric. *(just another rabbit hole actually, Unicode got plenty of them already)

evanb 9y ago
No reason not to have one for each IPA character.
scrollaway 9y ago
The entire IPA is available in unicode. You could treat those as ligatures with a special combinator character, which would work a lot like flags, skintones etc work. eg: [special begin character] + NEUTRAL FACE (U+1F610) + [IPA characters] + (special end character) = talking face! hurray! "text engine developers hate him"
- frik 9y ago
  Jesus man, have some respect for other humans, and some leniency where it's warranted.
chrisseaton 9y ago
> Unicode isn't English or even Indo-European centric It definitely is! The Latin alphabet gets a special place at the start of the range, in order to be compatible with ASCII, an English-language character set.
- throwanem 9y ago
  That doesn't say Unicode is English-centric. That just says it sought backwards compatibility with a then-dominant character set that was. Seeing as otherwise Unicode would likely have been regarded as a pointless exercise in ocean-boiling in many more quarters than it initially was, and would have faced a commensurately steeper slope to reach wide adoption, I'm not sure what better alternative you see the initial designers having forgone to choose as they did.
  - chrisseaton 9y ago
    > I'm not sure what better alternative you see the initial designers having forgone to choose as they did I didn't criticise it, did I? I just pointed it out. So I don't need to see any better alternative. But I don't follow your argument - it's not English centric because they were only bending over backwards to make sure that the English-speaking world accepted it by designing it around them?
    - throwanem 9y ago
      Rather, because they chose to design it such that those regions of the world already not burdened with ugly character-set compatibility hacks (code pages! retch) would continue not to be so burdened, so as to ease adoption there and make it more likely they'd succeed in relieving everyone else of the compatibility hack burden. I'm not sure why it matters which regions those were.

tzahola 9y ago

Unicode is already a joke with arbitrary emojis added every other week without discipline...

evanb 9y ago
https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/person-lotus-position/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/person-lotus-position...