From: John Hudson (john@tiro.ca)
Date: Tue Dec 30 2008 - 13:23:30 CST
Ruszlan Gaszanov wrote:
> Then why on Earth are we discussing *encoding as text* something that is
> unlikely to be ever transmitted or rendered as text in the first place?
Because some telecom companies are currently *transmitting* a basic set
of emoji as text, using non-standardised encoding. Presumably, if they
had chosen a different mechanism, some other standards organisation
would be debating the merits of emoji. The fact that a different
mechanism is going to be necessary to realise the full potential of
emoji -- as an open set, as personalised representations of individuals
within user communities -- strongly suggests to me that proposal to
encode the currently employed subset of emoji is the solution to the
wrong problem.
JH
--
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Gulf Islands, BC tiro@tiro.com
The Lord entered her to become a servant.
The Word entered her to keep silence in her womb.
The thunder entered her to be quiet.
-- St Ephrem the Syrian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:33:07 CST