Andre Schappo via Unicode
unicode at unicode.org
Sun Oct 29 08:47:51 CDT 2017
Thank you very much for your informative response. I see that U+1F321 ➜ U+1F32C do not have Emoji_Presentation property set. Time for me to do some reading to determine why.
On 29 Oct 2017, at 00:20, Peter Edberg <pedberg at unicode.org<mailto:pedberg at unicode.org>> wrote:
This is about characters U+1F327,U+1F326
The variation selector FE0F is *not* unnecessary in with these. Looking at
those characters do *not* have the Emoji-Presentation property set, and they do have variation sequences defined.
From https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Emoji_Variation_Selector_Notes, such singleton emoji characters
“should have emoji presentation selectors on base characters with Emoji_Presentation=No whenever an emoji presentation is desired”
- Peter E
On Oct 28, 2017, at 4:11 AM, Andre Schappo via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org<mailto:unicode at unicode.org>> wrote:
I am working on a Blog Article ( https://schappo.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/computer-science-internationalization.html ) and do not currently have access to OSX High Sierra, I am using OSX Sierra. I would appreciate some help from someone using OSX High Sierra.
Using Sierra's Chinese Simplified Input Method the Emoji ️ and ️ have an unnecessary U+FE0F variation selector appended. The other Emoji I have tested with Sierra's Chinese Simplified Input Method do not have the variation selector appended. Could someone please check if the same happens with High Sierra
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode