3 ms·
It might have been a rendering of U+2661 ♡ or U+2665 ♥ or U+2764 (this last one does get stripped by HN) which are not emoji but may be rendered as such by the
by dhosek 4y ago
It might have been a rendering of U+2661 ♡ or U+2665 ♥ or U+2764 (this last one does get stripped by HN) which are not emoji but may be rendered as such by the browser.
- sph 4y agoThis is dangerous information to spread. Censor yourself, or it will be abused and we will lose this easter egg forevermore. Let's keep it a secret between you, I and dang's emoji stripping code.
- ushakov 4y ago🆔 this type of thing works too
- sph 4y agoAh ffs, this is why we can't have nice things on the Internet.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Symbiote 4y agoThere's a fairly new CSS selector to configure emoji rendering, choosing between a text-like rendering and the coloured emoji rendering. So far, there's very little browser support. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/font-variant-emoji https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/font-varian...
- pxc 4y agoI really love the text-like style. I didn't know Unicode added as composing character to ask for that style! That's awesome. Those are so easy to read and I love how they play nice with users' font coloring choices.