| Title | Unicode Considering 67 New Emoji for 2016 | |
| Date | Wednesday October 14 2015, @01:31AM | |
| Author | cmn32480 | |
| Topic | ||
| from the more-pewp-emoji-too? dept. | ||
From Arstechnica:
While all new emoji options are welcomed, the Unicode 9.0 emoji class may not be as game changing as its predecessor based on this initial glance. This past June, Unicode 8.0 saw the consortium finally add skin tone modifiers for face emoji. That brought much needed diversity to the selection after Apple lobbied for such changes more than a year earlier.
Final decisions for what emoji are bundled with Unicode 9.0 won't be announced until June 2016. That's the end of a long journey for would-be emoji, a process that begins with submitters making sure any proposed Unicode addition isn't already in the expansive list of existing characters, the list of characters on track for inclusion, or the list of characters that have been rejected (among the forever deceased: Klingon script). You've then got to fill out a proposal form authoritatively establishing your character's significance, any relationships to current Unicode characters, and "the name and contact information for a company or individual who would agree to provide a computerized font... for publication of the standard." These proposals are then screened, sent to committee, and finally defended and revised by the original submitter as needed until they are accepted or rejected.
What do fellow SN users think about emoji in Unicode? Should Unicode contain emoji at all? Should Unicode only contain a handful of basic emoji like happy face and sad face? Or should Unicode contain every pictogram and hieroglyph known to man :wistful philosophical east asian male face indicating deep thought about trivial issues: ?
| Links |
printed from SoylentNews, Unicode Considering 67 New Emoji for 2016 on 2024-04-25 06:50:51