Re: Emoji
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 8:58 am
I found the following web page yesterday.
http://grouplens.org/blog/investigating ... ing-emoji/
There is a pdf document linked from that page.
http://grouplens.org/site-content/uploa ... tation.pdf
That pdf document appears to be the substantial document about the research.
The research is very interesting in relation to fonts as it includes some research on miscommunication that can be caused by the emoji fonts on different devices having different designs of the glyph for the same character code.
So the person sending a message may see, for a particular emoji character, one design of glyph and the recipient see a different design of glyph; and in some cases the different designs are being interpreted as having a different intended meaning.
I notice that they mention the Oxford Dictionary in relation to emoji. I had not known about that.
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2015 ... 015-emoji/
There is a video on the above page as well.
William Overington
14 April 2016
http://grouplens.org/blog/investigating ... ing-emoji/
There is a pdf document linked from that page.
http://grouplens.org/site-content/uploa ... tation.pdf
That pdf document appears to be the substantial document about the research.
The research is very interesting in relation to fonts as it includes some research on miscommunication that can be caused by the emoji fonts on different devices having different designs of the glyph for the same character code.
So the person sending a message may see, for a particular emoji character, one design of glyph and the recipient see a different design of glyph; and in some cases the different designs are being interpreted as having a different intended meaning.
I notice that they mention the Oxford Dictionary in relation to emoji. I had not known about that.
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2015 ... 015-emoji/
There is a video on the above page as well.
William Overington
14 April 2016