3 ms·

I am torn between supporting all languages (which easily leaks into supporting emojis) versus just using the 90~ Latin characters as the lingua franca. Look, I

I am torn between supporting all languages (which easily leaks into supporting emojis) versus just using the 90~ Latin characters as the lingua franca. Look, I would love to be able to read/write Sanskrit, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese etc and share those content and have everyone render and see the same thing. The problem is that I feel like most of these are: 1. a kind of an open problem 2. very subjective 3. very, very subjective as what you is mostly dictated by the implementation (fonts) For example, why does a gun emoji looks like water gun? Why is the skull-and-crossbones symbol looks so benign. In fact, it is often used as a meme (see deadass :skull:) Why is the basmala a single "character"? In my opinion, people should just learn how to use kaomoji. Granted, kaomojis rely on a lot more than the Latin characters but it is at least artful, skillfull and a natural extension of the "actual" languages. > inb4 languages evolves Yes, but it mostly happens naturally. I feel like what happens today mostly happens at the whim of a few passionate people in the standard.

zzo38computer 3y ago
> I am torn between supporting all languages (which easily leaks into supporting emojis) versus just using the 90~ Latin characters as the lingua franca. I don't want to support emoji either (and, I don't want emoji on my computer), although in some cases, if it is really necessary to be supported, they could be implemented just as text characters instead of as colourful emoji, anyways. For many purposes (e.g. computer codes) ASCII is good enough (and actually even can be better since it avoids the security problems of using Unicode). (Sometimes, character sets other than ASCII can be used, e.g. APL character set for APL programming.) > Look, I would love to be able to read/write Sanskrit, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese etc I also would, but Unicode is bad enough that I would use other ways of doing such a thing when possible (even writing my own programs, etc). (If a program insists on Unicode, I might just use ASCII only anyways, or write my own program) Not everyone necessarily need to see the same thing (if it is a text, rather than pictures of the text), although, the suitable character sets for that language which can be in use (and with fix pitch if necessary, etc), to auto select a suitable fonts for your computer by the reader's preference. So, I prefer to support all languages (where applicable; sometimes it isn't), without using Unicode.

zzo38computer 3y ago

> I am torn between supporting all languages (which easily leaks into supporting emojis) versus just using the 90~ Latin characters as the lingua franca. I don't want to support emoji either (and, I don't want emoji on my computer), although in some cases, if it is really necessary to be supported, they could be implemented just as text characters instead of as colourful emoji, anyways. For many purposes (e.g. computer codes) ASCII is good enough (and actually even can be better since it avoids the security problems of using Unicode). (Sometimes, character sets other than ASCII can be used, e.g. APL character set for APL programming.) > Look, I would love to be able to read/write Sanskrit, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese etc I also would, but Unicode is bad enough that I would use other ways of doing such a thing when possible (even writing my own programs, etc). (If a program insists on Unicode, I might just use ASCII only anyways, or write my own program) Not everyone necessarily need to see the same thing (if it is a text, rather than pictures of the text), although, the suitable character sets for that language which can be in use (and with fix pitch if necessary, etc), to auto select a suitable fonts for your computer by the reader's preference. So, I prefer to support all languages (where applicable; sometimes it isn't), without using Unicode.