> It might seem like a new fad to you, but emoji were long in use in Japan
And what are dingbat typefaces if not emoji under an other name? Nobody cared when unicode added U+2701 UPPER BLADE SCISSORS and U+273B TEARDROP SPOKED ASTERISK.
And what are dingbat typefaces if not emoji under an other name? Nobody cared when unicode added U+2701 UPPER BLADE SCISSORS and U+273B TEARDROP SPOKED ASTERISK.
The debate isn't about how to standardize the display of symbols on platforms, but how to allow the incorporation those symbols into everyday text.
Are you confused? U+2701 UPPER BLADE SCISSORS is a Unicode codepoint, it can most definitely be used "within regular text of another typeface".
> given the limited scope of dingbats symbols
There is no limited scope, dingbats is just stuff that's neither numbers nor "letters".
Just because nobody complained doesn't mean that it wasn't a problem.
A polluted standard makes it more difficult to implement the standard. In practice this is passed on to the user in performance and monetary cost, not in something more visible. The fact that you don't understand the problem is due to you not working with Unicode at a low level.
The amount of mind reading you believed you managed to accomplish from a setup and a punch line is pretty astounding. Maybe leave that to the magicians?