From: Markus Scherer (markus.icu@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Jan 07 2009 - 13:53:40 CST
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Roberts, Gary <Gary.Roberts@teradata.com>wrote:
> I don't like colours in character names unless I understand the reasoning
> (for example, I have no issues with RED DRAGON). The only example I caught
> that I do not understand is GREEN EARTH. Perhaps EARTH VIEWED FROM SPACE.
>
Rick also commented on this name. We will rename e-039 GREEN EARTH to just
EARTH.
See http://code.google.com/p/emoji4unicode/issues/detail?id=52
Font:
>
> The font looks pixel based (not surprising given the history of the encoded
> symbols). I think it needs to be line based. I particularly object to pixel
> based shading being used.
>
The font is an outline font, but the chart uses font images (.png files)
generated from the font's glyphs, to avoid having everyone download the
font.
I would prefer the font to look more symbol like, and less picture like.
> There is too much detail for me in this font. For example, I prefer the
> DoCoMo #172 glyph to the proposed e-008 glyph, although I think I would
> prefer not to have a black background (Maybe a white cresent moon with stars
> similar to the one in your porposed glyph, and no buildiings.). I understand
> that what I am asking for would be a lot of work, but I figure it doesn't
> hurt to ask.
>
I will note it as an issue. Personally, I don't care much about the
particular shapes as long as they are representative. The glyphs we have
were designed by someone (or some team) at Apple.
Hearts:
>
> Not sure about all these hearts, particularly distinctions between e-B13 -
> e-B16 Is there any semantics associated with the colour differences? Given
> the DoCoMo 'unification' of these, this appears to be a candidate for
> variant selectors.
>
Both KDDI and SoftBank distinguish these, and we apply the source separation
rule.
Source seperation rule:
>
> I think we should use variant selectors instead of encoding duplicate
> characters.
>
That's still source separation, it just pushes the encoding of such
characters from separate code points to separate registered variation
sequences, which is a more complicated mechanism and not usually done for
Unicode symbols.
Best regards,
markus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 07 2009 - 13:56:17 CST