7 ms·

Manicule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_(typography) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_(typography)

rvz 5y ago
Precisely. It is not an emoji and is under the miscellaneous unicode symbols in most OSes and the like. Not exactly 'Emojis'. But of course on Twitter, misinformation is ok. Downvoters: So you're telling me it is an emoji then? Is '' an emoji then? Can you see it?
- wildywayz 5y ago
  Doesn't matter what it was. https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/ https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/
  - rvz 5y ago
    You mean this? (U+261A) and not (U+1F448) [0] [1]? From: [0] > This Unicode character has no emoji version, meaning this is intended to display only as a black and white glyph on most platforms. I guess that means '' and 'U+261A' are emojis then? [0] https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/ https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/ [1] https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+261A https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+261A
    - yreg 5y ago
       is not specified by Unicode. Why are you so angry?
      - rvz 5y ago
        A very simple question: Is '' aka (U+F8FF) and 'U+261A' emojis? Yes or No?
        Ceiling 5y ago
        Emoji: a small digital image or icon used to express an idea, emotion, etc. Often times, yes.
        jfk13 5y ago
        > '' aka (U+F8FF) In passing: Many HN readers on non-Apple platforms probably don't see the glyph you intended in this comment. The Apple logo does not exist as a character in the Unicode standard. U+F8FF is a Private Use Area codepoint, which has no standardised, interoperable meaning. Yes, Apple uses this codepoint for the logo in their fonts, but that's purely a private matter, largely restricted to their platforms. (I wouldn't be surprised if non-Apple fonts that include it are actually violating a trademark, or something like that.)
        rvz 5y ago
        > Many HN readers on non-Apple platforms probably don't see the glyph you intended in this comment. That is the whole point of my comments. They cannot ever see it unless they are running on an Apple platform. Unless they wanted to see an empty box, the symbol is meaningless to non-Apple users. That is why I asked 'Can you see it?' Even posting the 'U+261A' glyph here on HN renders nothing and a box on other sites and that is defined in the standard; but they still cannot see it. So that is a definite 'No' then for '' aka (U+F8FF) and the same for 'U+261A'? OK. It has been indirectly admitted. Case closed.
        hnthrowaway4829 5y ago
        Yes
- dan-robertson 5y ago
  I think it is important to see it in its context, as an icon for “the finger of contempt” rather than the typical use of a manicule as a bullet point in an index or to connect some annotation with some text. That seems somewhat similar to the use of emoji today.
- breakfastduck 5y ago
  You're getting downvoted not because you're wrong about what that symbol is, but because you're immediately leaping from 'someone makes a light hearted comparison on twitter' to 'someone is spreading misinformation'. Honestly, there's really no need to take a throwaway tweet so seriously.
robin_reala 5y ago
For a use in literature, see letter 229 from Clarissa Harlowe: https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-richardson/clarissa-harlowe/text/letter-229 https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-richardson/clarissa...
jshprentz 5y ago
Paul McPharlin provides an extensive history of manicules starting on page 47 of his 1942 book, Roman Numerals, Typographic Leaves and Pointing Hands [1]. "Why did so many readers, until relatively recently, take the trouble to stop and draw a whole hand when they simply wanted to mark something as important? And why did so many authors and printers use the increasingly heavy-handed image of the manicule to direct the attention of their readers?" William H. Sherman explains in his 2005 paper, Toward a History of the Manicule [2]. [1] http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.b4200870 http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.b4200870 [2] http://www.livesandletters.ac.uk/papers/FOR_2005_04_001.pdf http://www.livesandletters.ac.uk/papers/FOR_2005_04_001.pdf
- gxqoz 5y ago
  This is also considered in Keith Houston's entertaining book Shady Characters: The Secret Life of Punctuation, Symbols, and Other Typographical Marks. It traces the history of some other common symbols such as the at sign and asterisk.

rvz 5y ago

Precisely. It is not an emoji and is under the miscellaneous unicode symbols in most OSes and the like. Not exactly 'Emojis'. But of course on Twitter, misinformation is ok. Downvoters: So you're telling me it is an emoji then? Is '' an emoji then? Can you see it?

wildywayz 5y ago
Doesn't matter what it was. https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/ https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/
- rvz 5y ago
  You mean this? (U+261A) and not (U+1F448) [0] [1]? From: [0] > This Unicode character has no emoji version, meaning this is intended to display only as a black and white glyph on most platforms. I guess that means '' and 'U+261A' are emojis then? [0] https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/ https://emojipedia.org/black-left-pointing-index/ [1] https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+261A https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+261A
  - yreg 5y ago
     is not specified by Unicode. Why are you so angry?
    - rvz 5y ago
      A very simple question: Is '' aka (U+F8FF) and 'U+261A' emojis? Yes or No?
      - Ceiling 5y ago
        Emoji: a small digital image or icon used to express an idea, emotion, etc. Often times, yes.
      - jfk13 5y ago
        > '' aka (U+F8FF) In passing: Many HN readers on non-Apple platforms probably don't see the glyph you intended in this comment. The Apple logo does not exist as a character in the Unicode standard. U+F8FF is a Private Use Area codepoint, which has no standardised, interoperable meaning. Yes, Apple uses this codepoint for the logo in their fonts, but that's purely a private matter, largely restricted to their platforms. (I wouldn't be surprised if non-Apple fonts that include it are actually violating a trademark, or something like that.)
        rvz 5y ago
        > Many HN readers on non-Apple platforms probably don't see the glyph you intended in this comment. That is the whole point of my comments. They cannot ever see it unless they are running on an Apple platform. Unless they wanted to see an empty box, the symbol is meaningless to non-Apple users. That is why I asked 'Can you see it?' Even posting the 'U+261A' glyph here on HN renders nothing and a box on other sites and that is defined in the standard; but they still cannot see it. So that is a definite 'No' then for '' aka (U+F8FF) and the same for 'U+261A'? OK. It has been indirectly admitted. Case closed.
      - hnthrowaway4829 5y ago
        Yes
dan-robertson 5y ago
I think it is important to see it in its context, as an icon for “the finger of contempt” rather than the typical use of a manicule as a bullet point in an index or to connect some annotation with some text. That seems somewhat similar to the use of emoji today.
breakfastduck 5y ago
You're getting downvoted not because you're wrong about what that symbol is, but because you're immediately leaping from 'someone makes a light hearted comparison on twitter' to 'someone is spreading misinformation'. Honestly, there's really no need to take a throwaway tweet so seriously.

robin_reala 5y ago

For a use in literature, see letter 229 from Clarissa Harlowe: https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-richardson/clarissa-harlowe/text/letter-229 https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-richardson/clarissa...

jshprentz 5y ago

Paul McPharlin provides an extensive history of manicules starting on page 47 of his 1942 book, Roman Numerals, Typographic Leaves and Pointing Hands [1]. "Why did so many readers, until relatively recently, take the trouble to stop and draw a whole hand when they simply wanted to mark something as important? And why did so many authors and printers use the increasingly heavy-handed image of the manicule to direct the attention of their readers?" William H. Sherman explains in his 2005 paper, Toward a History of the Manicule [2]. [1] http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.b4200870 http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.b4200870 [2] http://www.livesandletters.ac.uk/papers/FOR_2005_04_001.pdf http://www.livesandletters.ac.uk/papers/FOR_2005_04_001.pdf

gxqoz 5y ago
This is also considered in Keith Houston's entertaining book Shady Characters: The Secret Life of Punctuation, Symbols, and Other Typographical Marks. It traces the history of some other common symbols such as the at sign and asterisk.