Emoji discussion page.To add a new message, click on "Add Topic/Reply" button below, and set the "Subject".
To add a Reply, do the same as above, but leave the "Subject" blank.
Do we need a template if there is a UTF-8 emojis
{{Lang}} have this problem? It creates a ton of useless links, categories, articles…Ugh, no? What useless stuff does it create exactly? And how is {{MultiPage}} any different?
Like, for example of useless stuff: Why have an {{Emoji}} template, when Unicode Emojis already have existed for years in UTF-8? (This site already uses UTF-8 btw!) Not many Pages even use it.
{{Emoji}} template, when Unicode Emojis already have existed for years in UTF-8?I don’t consider them useless and that’s why:
- The emoji design will be the same for all OS;
- They work on Windows XP, Windows 7 and other systems that generally do not support modern emojis, since they do not have the right font.
…
- The emoji design will be the same for all OS;
- They work on Windows XP, Windows 7 and other systems that generally do not support modern emojis, since they do not have the right font.— THE OWL
The same can be said for UTF-8 Emojis. e.g 😀😃😄
I, as a Windows 7 user, can say that the {{Emoji}} template is better, because the emojis you gave in the example are not displayed for me ().
{{Emoji}} template is better.
UTF-8 Emojis (at least in the VDC’s case) rely on your system having a compatible font family. However, some systems lack a compatible font family. And the other operating systems that have a compatible font family completely differ from each other most of time.
{{Emoji}} template is better, because the emojis you gave in the example are not displayed for me ().Maybe because you don’t have the right unicode fonts? Here’s the historical Firefox Font for Emojis for instance.
What are these “some” systems?
How so? And why would that be a problem?
Any old operating system like Windows Vista or XP.
The problem is that the emojis look different because major operating systems and even some browsers come bundled with different fonts. To be fair, that is a minor issue, but an issue nonetheless.
Oh. Well why not just tell users to install some new Unicode fonts. Also, we already use unicode characters: the em-dash for example (—) and no one is complaining about that.
Why is that an issue to begin with?
I installed this font and set it instead of all fonts in the browser settings, but… it does not work as it should. Yes, emojis have appeared, but they are entirely composed of text color, so almost all elements merge. I also checked this font in notepad and other places and programs, but the problem is the same.
The {{Emoji}} template allows you to use unified emojis, and also allows you to add new emojis that may not even be in unicode.
We are talking about emojis. Unicode characters existed even in older versions of fonts and operating systems (mostly). For example, I have a keyboard modification that allows me to type many more useful characters from the keyboard, including em-dash, en-dash, correct single and double quotes in many languages, arrows and other interesting characters (even diacritics), and they all display correctly (with rare exceptions).
Well that is an old font for legacy Firefox; so I probably should have reminded you that. Still, this shows that it is quite easy to fix the font problem.
So what makes Emojis any different? Maybe you just don’t have the right font. Here's Noto Emoji, a modern font that should hopefully actually function and not bug out like the last one.
Well, this font really added normal emojis, not in a color style, but only in the form of an outline. However, something is wrong with the font, because the space character is catastrophically long, even a little longer than em-dash, and each digit has huge margins on the left and right.
I assume that this is due to the fact that the system simply does not support modern fonts with color emojis. That’s why i think it won’t be possible to just tell people to install a modern font and that’s it.
