From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs-27 60c84ad: ; * etc/TODO: Fix last change. Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2020 11:53:22 +0200 Message-ID: <83o8tbunzh.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20200229173124.11831.98476@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20200229173125.E2D3A21167@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83zhczxa2t.fsf@gnu.org> <83eeuay0ch.fsf@gnu.org> <83d09txw29.fsf@gnu.org> <83lfogw1gn.fsf@gnu.org> <83eeu8vy0e.fsf@gnu.org> <83v9njutez.fsf@gnu.org> <83tv33uop0.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="110588"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 05 10:54:21 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j9nCv-000Sep-1t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2020 10:54:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45980 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j9nCu-0003uA-1d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2020 04:54:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37125) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j9nCG-0003Uj-LL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2020 04:53:41 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41202) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j9nCG-0002f0-AN; Thu, 05 Mar 2020 04:53:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1037 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1j9nCF-0002o2-KB; Thu, 05 Mar 2020 04:53:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Robert Pluim on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 10:48:02 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:245258 Archived-At: > From: Robert Pluim > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2020 10:48:02 +0100 > > >>>>> On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 11:38:03 +0200, Eli Zaretskii said: > > Eli> So I see no problem here, and making this display by a non-default > Eli> font would be a regression, IMO, since that font could have different > Eli> height, be variable-pitch, etc. > > But isnʼt that the whole thing weʼre discussing here: displaying > characters with the Emoji property with a prettier font than either > the default font or Symbola? The u+2XXX and U+3XXX characters are not Emoji by default, they are supposed to be displayed as Emoji only if followed by the Emoji-style variation selector. Otherwise, they should be displayed in text representation.