“Same same but different: Unicode Variation Selector-16”:
https://blog.tomayac.com/2019/12/12/same-same-but-different-unicode-variation-selector-16/ …
A post on the difference between
and
in which I find out about U+FE0F and file @ChromeDevTools and @AMPhtml feature requests. This was fun to write!
Thanks, @jaffathecake and @mathias.
-
-
Note that macOS is disagreeing with UTS51 here: “only fully-qualified emoji zwj sequences should be generated by keyboards and other user input devices.” https://unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Emoji_Implementation_Notes … (Time to change the “should” to “must”?)
-
Of note is that Chrome does show some codepoints, on input only, as red dots. the C0 control codes for example:pic.twitter.com/x12rAGzKin
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
“Damage” seems rather hyperbolic. You could not put emoji in computer language identifiers…
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
JavaScript, HTML, CSS, HTTP, performance, security, Bash, Unicode, i18n, macOS.
