5 ms·

Those date from 1993 and 2010. There's also U+26D4 NO ENTRY (2009) and U+1F6C7 PROHIBITED SIGN (2014). I wonder what the history is that we ended up with four

Those date from 1993 and 2010. There's also U+26D4 NO ENTRY (2009) and U+1F6C7 PROHIBITED SIGN (2014). I wonder what the history is that we ended up with four different code points for a similar concept.

pimlottc 3y ago
I included just the ones that were the same visual representation, U+26D4 is a different symbol. The glyph for U+1F6C7 seems to be missing in most places, I can't find an authoritative representation of it to confirm it's the same visual symbol. EDIT: Looks like U+1F6C7 "PROHIBITED SIGN" is indeed the same symbol, as seen in the Unicode 7.0 charts [0] 0: https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-7.0/U70-1F680.pdf https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-7.0/U70-1F680.pdf
- JadeNB 3y ago
  > I included just the ones that were the same visual representation, U+26D4 is a different symbol. The glyph for U+1F6C7 seems to be missing in most places, I can't find an authoritative representation of it to confirm it's the same visual symbol. I don't think that there's any meaningful sense in which two Unicode code points may be said to have, or not have, the same symbol, except in reference to a particular font. The standard just indicates some possibilities: > The shapes of the reference glyphs used in these code charts are not prescriptive. Considerable variation is to be expected in actual fonts. The particular fonts used in these charts were provided to the Unicode Consortium by a number of different font designers, who own the rights to the fonts.
  - pimlottc 3y ago
    Sure, but the topic at hand here is not unicode code points, but a particular visual symbol.
philwelch 3y ago
And yet we still needed to do Han unification. Unicode is ridiculous at this point.
- WorldMaker 3y ago
  To be fair, two of the four discussed here (U+1F6AB and U+1F6C7) are early "astral plane" emoji just after Unicode gave up on Han unification as a plan and moved back to trying to better round-trip existing encodings. The existence of emoji in general is partly Unicode's mea culpa for attempting Han unification in the first place. (It was an odd sort of apology, given most of the damage was already done and the astral plane should have probably opened up a lot sooner in hindsight, but it was a fascinating sort of apology in the way that emoji has done more for Unicode acceptance testing in first-language-English developed applications than just about any other block in Unicode history.)

pimlottc 3y ago

I included just the ones that were the same visual representation, U+26D4 is a different symbol. The glyph for U+1F6C7 seems to be missing in most places, I can't find an authoritative representation of it to confirm it's the same visual symbol. EDIT: Looks like U+1F6C7 "PROHIBITED SIGN" is indeed the same symbol, as seen in the Unicode 7.0 charts [0] 0: https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-7.0/U70-1F680.pdf https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-7.0/U70-1F680.pdf

JadeNB 3y ago
> I included just the ones that were the same visual representation, U+26D4 is a different symbol. The glyph for U+1F6C7 seems to be missing in most places, I can't find an authoritative representation of it to confirm it's the same visual symbol. I don't think that there's any meaningful sense in which two Unicode code points may be said to have, or not have, the same symbol, except in reference to a particular font. The standard just indicates some possibilities: > The shapes of the reference glyphs used in these code charts are not prescriptive. Considerable variation is to be expected in actual fonts. The particular fonts used in these charts were provided to the Unicode Consortium by a number of different font designers, who own the rights to the fonts.
- pimlottc 3y ago
  Sure, but the topic at hand here is not unicode code points, but a particular visual symbol.

philwelch 3y ago

And yet we still needed to do Han unification. Unicode is ridiculous at this point.

WorldMaker 3y ago
To be fair, two of the four discussed here (U+1F6AB and U+1F6C7) are early "astral plane" emoji just after Unicode gave up on Han unification as a plan and moved back to trying to better round-trip existing encodings. The existence of emoji in general is partly Unicode's mea culpa for attempting Han unification in the first place. (It was an odd sort of apology, given most of the damage was already done and the astral plane should have probably opened up a lot sooner in hindsight, but it was a fascinating sort of apology in the way that emoji has done more for Unicode acceptance testing in first-language-English developed applications than just about any other block in Unicode history.)