Adding RAINBOW FLAG to Unicode
c933103 at gmail.com
Mon Jun 29 14:04:11 CDT 2015
2015年6月30日 上午1:13於 "Noah Slater" <nslater at tumbolia.org>wrote：
> Thanks for the reply, Ken! Comments inline.
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 at 15:50 Ken Whistler <kenwhistler at att.net> wrote:
>> There is no effective end to the "or otherwise" case for flags as
symbols, and that is why they are "generally not amenable to representation
by encoded characters".
> Well. Arguably, Unicode represents food, and there is no effective end to
the "or otherwise" case for food items either. (As I'm sure you're all
aware of given the popularity of requests in this category.)
> As mentioned earlier in the thread, it seems to me that the Consortium
has a rigorous (and notoriously hard to satisfy) process for guarding
against such things. The rainbow flag is ubiquitous, so much so that it's
even become a compat issue with existing communications platforms. The same
is most likely not true for the less common flags.
> It seems to me that the correct thing to do here is to apply the existing
process to this proposal (and any subsequent ones, should they occur). I
similarly doubt that there is a particularly strong case for the Oakland
flag, in accordance with Annex C.
As an outsider, In my opinion, it is very common for people to write
sentences like " Really sorry!" or " let's meet there tomorroe" or "The
is tasty" even before unicode's introduction of these characters, but I
can't think of different usecases that the rainbow flag would be used in
>> That is not the realm of *characters* -- it is the realm of graphic
>> flags, emblems, and frankly, at this point, heraldry. ;-)
> Well, you could say the same about all the emojis. Emojis blur the line
between characters (in a typographical sense) and iconography. Again, I
would simply point out that Annex C seems to be designed to handle exactly
this domain of concerns.
As i typed above.
>> So, to sum up, I suggest that this thread about the RAINBOW FLAG be
>> directed to the soon-to-be-posted Public Review Issue about extending
>> the generative mechanisms for representing emoji symbols for flags
> How do we/I do that?
> I will restate that I think that if a RAINBOW FLAG emoji is added to
Unicode, I expect wide use. And I am concerned that an alternate proposal
would run the risk of not seeing wide use. (Though I have no actual
experience here that informs that. I welcome feedback on the topic.)
As long as an incorporated solution is made like how those US or UK flag
currently is presented in unicode emoji, I don't think different mechanism
would matter too much as you see people using them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode