4 ms·

> How do you scribble "family of three: mom, father, daughter" without any emojis? Using nifty little things called jpegs.

Timon3 3y ago
How do you propose they get transmitted? In-band in the middle of text (good luck reading that with an unsupported editor), or through servers, necessitating NAT and all that good fun? Since the images can be arbitrary you also open yourself up to bugs in the parser. All around a much, much worse idea compared to text emojis.
- perryizgr8 3y ago
  > good luck reading that with an unsupported editor You need a "supported editor" to display Unicode emojis too, as TFA shows. And supposedly it is quite hard. OTOH displaying jpegs is a solved problem.
  - Timon3 3y ago
    > You need a "supported editor" to display Unicode emojis too, as TFA shows. Let's give this a try. This is roughly what a sentence with an emoji looks like in an unsupported editor: hello [] world (with [] being the well-known "placeholder" square). Now let's try the same with an emoji, I went with 16x16 to make this kind of bearable, but realistically you'd want at least 64x64: hello  world Now, which one is more readable?
kergonath 3y ago
How is that any better? You can’t integrate them easily in the text, you still have to store the images and send them around, and there’s no way of normalising them, which means that this has all the inconvenience of Unicode without any of the features that help handling code points and glyphs, and even smaller probability of it being rendered correctly.

Timon3 3y ago

How do you propose they get transmitted? In-band in the middle of text (good luck reading that with an unsupported editor), or through servers, necessitating NAT and all that good fun? Since the images can be arbitrary you also open yourself up to bugs in the parser. All around a much, much worse idea compared to text emojis.

perryizgr8 3y ago
> good luck reading that with an unsupported editor You need a "supported editor" to display Unicode emojis too, as TFA shows. And supposedly it is quite hard. OTOH displaying jpegs is a solved problem.
- Timon3 3y ago
  > You need a "supported editor" to display Unicode emojis too, as TFA shows. Let's give this a try. This is roughly what a sentence with an emoji looks like in an unsupported editor: hello [] world (with [] being the well-known "placeholder" square). Now let's try the same with an emoji, I went with 16x16 to make this kind of bearable, but realistically you'd want at least 64x64: hello  world Now, which one is more readable?

kergonath 3y ago

How is that any better? You can’t integrate them easily in the text, you still have to store the images and send them around, and there’s no way of normalising them, which means that this has all the inconvenience of Unicode without any of the features that help handling code points and glyphs, and even smaller probability of it being rendered correctly.