Comment by tomxor
13 days ago
> Were the text written today, they would claim emojis belong in unicode as well.
Not sure what you mean, unicode does contain emojis. That's what most platform use for emojis now,
13 days ago
> Were the text written today, they would claim emojis belong in unicode as well.
Not sure what you mean, unicode does contain emojis. That's what most platform use for emojis now,
But should it contain emoji? I can copy and paste bold text from one rich text editor to another just fine. Why not use XML to encode emoji?
<emoticon type="graphical" value="PILE OF POO" entity="&x1F4A9;" fallback="" fallback-encoding="utf-8" />
Yes, Unicode even defines characters for subindex and superindex. It's quite capable for basic inline math equations.
Which adds complexity and solves nothing. We'd better have a standard markup (we already have) than this half-assed wannabe-markup that is so complex and a minefield that modern forums tend to filter it anyway. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_subscripts_and_super... – The wikipedia article about unicode sub/superscripts can't even render half of these symbols on neither of my {ios,windows,android} devices. In theory we have it, in practice it's dead baggage.
Weren't many of those formatting codes - maybe not sub/superindex? - deprecated (but preserved for backward compatibility)?
I don't think so, but I'm not so familiar with that topic.
Julia uses them quite extensively to make source code closer to math.