Hello Kjetil,
On 03/03/2021 08:08, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 13:40 -0800, Ned Freed wrote:
I like the simple base-emoji rule. After all, to support the full set
of emojis as per the UTS51, you need Unicode 13 support, which is
relatively new.
Let's put this into perspective. Unicode 13 added 5930 characters. The
overwhelming majority of those (4939 characters) were CJK. Only 65 emoji were
added. You can view them here:
https://unicode.org/emoji/charts-13.0/emoji-released.html
Obviously experiences vary, but none of these are things I've missed having
available to express a reaction.
What? U+1F9A4 \N{dodo} is highly relevant as a reaction! :)
But I was a bit confused. For Perl's part, they did not implement
emoji properties until 5.32 as part of their incorporation of Unicode
13, since the Unicode Emoji wasn't included in Unicode proper until
13.0. However, Unicode Emoji has, as a related standard, had these
mechanisms since its version 2.0 from November 2015.
Emoji were always part of Unicode proper, some of them (e.g. the
snowman) even way before they were called emoji. What changed between
Unicode 12 and Unicode 13 is the location of some of the property data
files in the data published by Unicode. That may have motivated Perl's
change in implementation between these two versions.
[I know this because I'm in charge of the Ruby side of things; I have
yet to update to Unicode 13.0, and the change in file location is one of
the items on my plate.]
Regards, Martin.
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
