In article <aae001e4-e69b-408d-1e76-871d2d3cd941@xxxxxxxx> you write: >> Probably, but I think it bears saying something about how to handle >> code points without the Emoji property set. IMHO they should be >> handled as undisplayable. > >This steps into user interface design, more than interoperable emoji >labeling and transport. > >As such, it's outside of this specification and outside of the IETF's >expertise. The Unicode consortium adds new emoji and combinations several times a year, so depending on how often people update their software it is common for a sender's and a recipient's systems to disagree about what are valid emoji. This is not a tarpit we need to step in. R's, John -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
