RE: Tag characters

And yet UTC devotes lots of effort (with an entire subcommittee) to encode more emoji as characters, but no effort toward any preferred longer term solution not based on characters.


Peter

From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-bounces_at_unicode.org] On Behalf Of Shervin Afshar
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 2:27 PM
To: wjgo_10009_at_btinternet.com
Cc: unicode_at_unicode.org
Subject: Re: Tag characters

Thinking about this further, could the technique be used to solve the requirements of
section 8 Longer Term Solutions

IMO, the industry preferred longer term solution (which is also discussed in that section with few existing examples) for emoji, is not going to be based on characters.


↪ Shervin

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 1:40 PM, William_J_G Overington <wjgo_10009_at_btinternet.com<mailto:wjgo_10009_at_btinternet.com>> wrote:
> What else would be possible if the same sort of technique were applied to another base character?


Thinking about this further, could the technique be used to solve the requirements of

section 8 Longer Term Solutions

of

http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/tr51-2.html

?


Both colour pixel map and colour OpenType vector font solutions would be possible.


Colour voxel map and colour vector 3d solids solutions are worth thinking about too as fun coding thought experiments that could possibly lead to useful practical results.



William Overington


14 May 2015

Received on Thu May 14 2015 - 21:45:09 CDT