Q: why is this    an emoji?

Before I forget... the "rear view" of your avatar is lost to me as my Mac Pismo's display is busted all to H*** = repost? as I feel it your best side (I could get to it, but I always forget it when I hook up the Pismo to the TV)

On my Android, YahooMail App there are emoji which I assume are in a font somewhere.

ABOVE is displayed in Thunderbird mail client in Win10 (gosh I hate this... if I could only dave my $ to get my Mac fixed!) - I had to add an "add-on" (similar to a FF add-on) to get emoji -- that I NEVER use, BTW. Makes me wonder about the whole font based dealio, though I suppose it could be a font somewhere... perhaps this one?

The only other place I visit that has 'em is FB & the Tweetie which I am also assuming is serving them up in their own way since they are available platform independent - AND seem to be a "custom" set available only there

- which is Tom's point about ASC must implement emoji HERE locally - like it does for Myriad Set Pro font that we also see platform independently.

We cannot choose AnyOldSystemFontWeWant in a post here (probably a good thing)

see the latter parts of my reply to Kurt > Re: Re: Hi I was just wondering why the **** is this    an emoji?

Almost forgot (again)...

UniCode is "standards (specification) body" - like ISO is a "standards" outfit - they define a standard with which font makers "comply" - right?

Kurt Lang wrote:

 

 

You'll also notice that many of the Emojis that could be in the font, aren't.

What are some examples of that?  I thought the font could display all officially approved characters, although there could be a lag in updates of course.

ChitlinsCC wrote:

 

ASC must implement emoji HERE locally - like it does for Myriad Set Pro font that we also see platform independently.

 

 

That would be the wrong way to do it.  Having to download a webfont to see Unicode standardized content should never be required and indicates incompetent programming. 

MY understanding is that emoji fonts CAN have characters that are unique to that font - I assumed that AppleColorEmoji font was one of those.

A couple of interesting reads

http://emojipedia.org/apple/ios-9.3/

http://mashable.com/2014/06/18/so-who-controls-emoji-anyway/#aTHhV8Cu.8q7

The latter says in part [emphasis is mine]

...

Apple has long been one of the biggest emoji proponents. In Japan, Apple has supported emoji since iOS 2.2. With iOS 5, Apple moved to the new Unicode standard. Apple has had support for emoji in OS X since OS X 10.7 Lion. That means that you can add emoji characters to virtually any Mac app's data entry screen. It also means that Safari (on iOS and OS X) supports emoji natively. Apple even has its own font, Apple Color Emoji, to provide color images for each of 889 glyphs. Of the various emoji sets in wide-use, Apple's are probably closer to the "official" method.

Reading on in that article... What does it suggest?

That there are indeed "different' sets (fonts) produced by other publishers. And that "global" adoption in apps is far from complete

I could suggest Apple Support Feedback > Discussions menu item, but that would be preaching to the choir, wouldn't it?

UniCode is NOT a publisher, it is a standards body. > http://www.unicode.org/standard/standard.html

Perhaps you could give us an example how ANY emoji is inserted or viewed without invoking a "stylesheet" that loads an emoji font

The articles explain how it is done now - FONTs

I would have thought Apple's emoji font would contain all of the currently assigned glyphs, but it doesn't. I had the full list open on the Unicode site, and Apple Color Emoji open in the public beta version of FontLab Studio VI. There rather than the standard glyph palette so I could scroll through them faster. There are quite a few that don't exist in the font.

More importantly. are there ANY in AppleColorEmoji font that are UNIQUE to that font?

Well, yes. You can put any glyph you want in a font, whether it logically belongs there or not.

The entire point of the Unicode standard for all fonts is so they produce the same glyph when entering that Unicode value no matter what language your computer is set to use.

That was the entire problem with virtually all older fonts. Pretty much the only glyphs that were in the same place almost all the time were 0-9, A-Z, a-z and standard puncuation. After that, you never knew where a special character would be without a chart for each font.

At a somewhat quick glance, no, I didn't notice any unique glyphs. But it would quite some time to compare every one currently in the font to the list. Anyone could do it, though. Open the Character Palette and choose Emoji. Every emoji currently part of the font will be shown. Compare them to the list and look for one that isn't on the full Unicode list.

A tad confused...

My question to which you reply was rhetorical "What does this tell us?" (it tells us that all kinds of folks are making emoji fonts and there is no universal font adopted - nor any universal way of implementing them into some apps - Chrome was mentioned)

Are you actually answering my other question from later "are there ANY in AppleColorEmoji(ACE) font that are UNIQUE to that font?" If so, "You can put any glyph you want... " is not really the answer to "which ones are ONLY in ACE font and not in other fonts?"

As far as I could quickly see, Apple's emoji font only contains glyphs that conform with the Unicode standard. As it should be since a system version of emoji should be standard for the Mac OS, Windows, Linux, Unix and whatever else so if you use a standard emoji, all users will see the intended glyph.

But yes, there are already hundreds of secondary emoji fonts. A 16 bit font can hold 65,536 glyphs. Considering how many different objects people could possibly want as an emoji, it is a woefully short number. Third party fonts then are guarenteed to be created in order to give users the kinds of emojis they would like to use, but will never, or may never be added to the Unicode standard. The trouble with those is only you, and fellow users who have these extra emoji fonts installed will see the glyph you meant them to see.

[chuckle]

I am not invested enough in this issue to do a side by side assay of every single glyph

I thought maybe it might be obvious, like a certain few positions that are reserved for VERY special characters

- like the AppleLogo character MUST take up a spot in Myriad and is some other glyph in ones that don't have it.

from

The Apple Logo in Unicode

http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/OSX/unicode_apple_logo.html

...

... The problem is that the unicode value used is one of several that is set aside for private use. That means that each operating system, or application, or implementation is free to use those unicode characters for anything they want. It just so happens that Apple has chosen to use unicode character U+F8FF (decimal value 63743, or on the web as either  or ) as the Apple Logo. But some Windows fonts put in a Windows logo. And some other fonts put in a Klingon Mummification glyph. Or elven script. Or anything they want. And if it isn't defined in your local font, you'll just see a square. So who knows what you might see when I put the character in right here: 

Yes, on a Mac, you probably see an actual Apple Logo. But on other systems, you probably see other things.

...

SEE?

Kurt Lang wrote:

 

There are quite a few that don't exist in the font.

If you wind up looking at it again, I'd be interested in check out some specific examples...