3 ms·

The tahitans can deal with communication just fine with only 13 letters, so I guess we could probably trim the letters b, c, d and g out of unicode too. With e

by Closi 3y ago

The tahitans can deal with communication just fine with only 13 letters, so I guess we could probably trim the letters b, c, d and g out of unicode too. With enough optimisation we might just be able to communicate with just a boolean-based language. (i.e. why limit written communication rather than make it richer)

zamadatix 3y ago
That you can take something too far in one direction doesn't give reason or explanation for anything except "don't take it too far in that direction". There are probably good explanations why not to take things infinitely far in either direction but they don't really help explain where the line should be drawn. I think the actual argument here is encoding of seemingly arbitrary colored pictorial combinations overcomplicates character encoding. If you want to display a colored drawing of an arbitrary family SVG is already a thing but if you want to textually encode an arbitrary family you should use characters in your language not expect the text encoding to pick up more arbitrary drawings. To me, using Emoji was probably a great way to force developer's hands on supporting certain encoding features more complicated languages use even in cases they only wanted to support latin text. That said, this job is already done. We don't need to continue putting everything into ever more complex pictorial encodings via Unicode for the rest of time.
- Closi 3y ago
  That’s true, but if your argument can be extended to absurdity it probably can't be used to justify where the 'correct' place on the scale is to land.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  > That you can take something too far in one direction doesn't give reason or explanation for anything except "don't take it too far in that direction". Why or how does the Tahitian language take things too far?

3 ms·

The tahitans can deal with communication just fine with only 13 letters, so I guess we could probably trim the letters b, c, d and g out of unicode too. With e

by Closi 3y ago

zamadatix 3y ago
That you can take something too far in one direction doesn't give reason or explanation for anything except "don't take it too far in that direction". There are probably good explanations why not to take things infinitely far in either direction but they don't really help explain where the line should be drawn. I think the actual argument here is encoding of seemingly arbitrary colored pictorial combinations overcomplicates character encoding. If you want to display a colored drawing of an arbitrary family SVG is already a thing but if you want to textually encode an arbitrary family you should use characters in your language not expect the text encoding to pick up more arbitrary drawings. To me, using Emoji was probably a great way to force developer's hands on supporting certain encoding features more complicated languages use even in cases they only wanted to support latin text. That said, this job is already done. We don't need to continue putting everything into ever more complex pictorial encodings via Unicode for the rest of time.
- Closi 3y ago
  That’s true, but if your argument can be extended to absurdity it probably can't be used to justify where the 'correct' place on the scale is to land.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  > That you can take something too far in one direction doesn't give reason or explanation for anything except "don't take it too far in that direction". Why or how does the Tahitian language take things too far?