let's say there's some kind of mishap at the unicode consortium and you are appointed, for a day, as Acting Dictator of Unicode. you are permitted to unilaterally add one new emoji to the unicode standard, which will stay there forever. what do you add?
@typhlosion Nothing so simple as adding one new emoji to the standard.
I'm going to require that all artwork in #emoji proposals be released into the public domain, and be submitted in the form of industry-standard open font formats, so that font implementors can use the standard-supplied glyphs when adding characters to their fonts.
I'll also publish a memo calling for the #Unicode Consortium to maintain a font like Noto, and for OS/app makers to options for users to supply their own fonts.
@glowingskull this isn't quite as whimsical as the question i was attempting to pose in my hypothetical, and as such goes against the spirit of the question in a mildly fun-ruining way. i expected better from a glowing skull
@glowingskull @dzuk YOU GET TO ADD ONE EMOJI. which one do you add. that is the question. answer within the scope of the question
@typhlosion @dzuk :stomps in circles:
Fine, I'll add a Variation Selector-16 sequence for ‽ so that people have to stop using "interrobang" as the shortcode for ⁉️ .
@glowingskull @typhlosion I already did create a whole comprehensive set of colour modifiers for natural and unnatural colours? (there's like, 42 of them IIRC)
@dzuk now imagine those being properly supported by Unicode and non-Mutant-Standard fonts.
@glowingskull that would be very bad IMO.
Mutant Standard is about providing emoji that people want that Unicode isn't supporting, but it's also made to question their legitimacy and drive a wedge into their standards.
One organisation shouldn't be making a visual language like this for the rest of the world. Furthermore, emoji is a subtler form of cultural influence on the part of tech corporations.
I really don't want corporations getting in on our queerness and so on.
You've probably heard my talking points before
@dzuk Generally agreed that language shouldn't be beholden to a single entity, but on the other hand, I think that for the sake of communication, there should be a single metalanguage for encoding language, and Unicode is it for string-based languages. https://xkcd.com/927/ and all that.
And yes, most emoji shouldn't've been added to Unicode; they would've been easier to implement as stickers and :shortcode:s.
But if the corporations are already in our queerness, let's force them to be as queer as can be.
You've probably heard my talking points before
@glowingskull yeah, I agree with Unicode for text (although they have fucked up numerous times with the encoding of non-European scripts)
For corporations tho, I suppose we're gonna have to agree to disagree. They can act queer, but like with anything, it's a mask. They should always be treated with incredible hostility IMO.
@dzuk Yeah, I prefer to co-opt, subvert, and reform metasystems rather than replace them outright.
@glowingskull yeah, i think what I said was reactionary, I do agree with you, I guess it's just that with things like emoji, I feel like it's an intrusion into personal life, much like what corporate social media is. I don't have a problem in reforming and pushing, I guess I also feel it's important to tell corporations where and when they should be sticking their noses in things.
@glowingskull Like, they are trying to colonise more and more of our personal space and our personal lives and the way we talk to each other and we have to stem and reverse these serious violations of boundaries.
I guess what I mean to say is, I agree for reformation, but sometimes that also means telling them no, and telling them where their place is.
@glowingskull Also if they're trying to influence culture in the way they do, I think one of the building blocks of reform is reversing the trend of cultural influence, so people can see them for what they are instead of the image of personhood and benevolence that they keep projecting.
@typhlosion The glowing skull is a facade through which I confront reality.
Another proposal: emoji of unspecified gender must have gender-neutral representations.
Alternate proposal: an end to new ZWJ sequences; all future combined characters must use font ligatures. Deprecate current ZWJs.
Reality: to make @dzuk's life easier, introduce a canonical spectrum of color modifiers to be used with emoji (not with text!) for skin color. Green and yellow and grey and purple, ahoy.