6 ms·

I think the big difference between gif and emoji is that you need to see a gif to know what it represents.

• lapcat 3y ago
  You mean in terms of accessibility? The good news is that Twitter, err, X gifs already have built-in alt text. Apparently emoji aren't the greatest for accessibility: https://www.tiny.cloud/blog/emojis-and-accessibility/ https://www.tiny.cloud/blog/emojis-and-accessibility/ It may be even worse for emoticons, so that's a legitimate criticism: https://uxdesign.cc/emojis-in-accessibility-how-to-use-them-properly-66b73986b803 https://uxdesign.cc/emojis-in-accessibility-how-to-use-them-...
  • fikama 3y ago
    What you written about lack of scalability of emoji for me is their advantege over gifs. To understand a meaning of a word/emoji/gif you have to see it in context several times or look up a definition. (with emojis and gifs there is additional problem in lack of dictionaries for them). When amount of words in a language is finite or they are extending slowly (emoji) I ma able to keep up with thier meanings as opposed to gifs and memes. Which are evolving to quickly for me to keep up.
    • lapcat 3y ago
      > What you written about lack of scalability of emoji for me is their advantege over gifs. What I mean by lack of scalability is that there is insatiable demand for new emoji but only finite Unicode code space for them. This is has even become a social/political problem, because everyone insists on equal "representation" in emoji in terms of skin color, gender, etc. We couldn't just stop at Simpsons-style yellow faces.
  • oneeyedpigeon 3y ago
    > The good news is that Twitter, err, X gifs already have built-in alt text. The bad news is that X's gifs' alt text is absolute trash most of the time. Stuff like "office stare gif" etc.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]