3 ms·
My issue is with those emojis is that they don't meet a few of their own criteria for a new emoji to be accepted. Their guideline: https://unicode.org/emoji/pr
by bXVsbGVy 4y ago
My issue is with those emojis is that they don't meet a few of their own criteria for a new emoji to be accepted.
Their guideline: https://unicode.org/emoji/proposals.html#selection_factors_inclusion https://unicode.org/emoji/proposals.html#selection_factors_i...
For instance, they suggest using "elephant" to evaluate the usage:
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all_2008&gprop=images&q=elephant,pregnant%20man https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all_2008&gprop...
- JellyBeanThief 4y agoUneducated guess--somewhere someone will have archived the discussion--but I wonder if the technical complexity was also a factor. If you've made the combining characters for gender, and you've designated which characters can combine with them, but you didn't plan for characters that must be combined only in certain ways, then you're looking at having to specify all that out, and then implementers will have do their thing, and it just... wasn't worth it. Uneducated guess, though. EDIT: Googled. Here is a person who knows what was up: https://jenniferdaniel.substack.com/p/did-someone-say-new-emoji https://jenniferdaniel.substack.com/p/did-someone-say-new-em...
- dcormier 4y agoThe submission guidelines have changed over time. I would assume that, at the time, the proposals _did_ meet the guidelines.
- bXVsbGVy 4y agoThe proposal has a section comparing the frequencies for "pregnant-man" and "pregnant-person" with "elephant". It was a criteria back then. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20190r-swollen-belly-emoji.pdf https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20190r-swollen-belly-emoji.... Most (if not all) gender neutral emojis were proposed by the same person.