Loomio
Tue 6 Jan 2015 3:52AM

Emoji Support

G GP Public Seen by 237

I think diaspora* should support emojis.

Emojis are Unicode smileys that originate from Japan. They were popularized by their integration in smartphone keyboards. They are very, very popular and are quickly becoming a standard in smiley usage. In fact, the Global Language Monitor determined that the heart emoji was last year's most popular "word".

Read more about emoji characters on Wikipedia.

However, even if they are widely supported on iOS and Android, emoji characters are very poorly supported on desktops and on the Web. See an example here. You should not see squares.

To remedy this problem, developers created Emoji One, an open source collection of emoji characters that are embedded directly on the Web. Twitter did the same, and now share their emojis with WordPress.com.

I suggest that diaspora* should do the same. I find emojis cute, they are becoming an open standard and they are very efficient in sharing feelings over the network.

Are you a developer? If you are interested in this idea, take a look at this page and this page.

Warning!

I bet some people will assume that emojis automatically replaces traditional text smileys/emoticons like :) or :(

This is wrong!

As you read earlier, emojis have their own Unicode characters. For example, a grinning face is Unicode U+1F603 (😃). No need to setup something like a system that replaces :grin: with an image!

Oh, and you don't like emojis? Well emojis are Unicode characters, so not displaying them properly because you don't approve them would be censorship! Diaspora* users should have the free speech to spam their contacts with how many emojis they like. 😉

BB

Brent Bartlett Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:10AM

I think that Diaspora should support the full Unicode set, if possible. I support this.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:13AM

I tested emoji support in diaspora* and it is… null for now.

For example, if I share "🐭", the Preview shows me the mouse (🐭), but after I send the message we lose the mouse!

Result: a nice, empty post. 😕

DU

Dumitru Ursu Tue 6 Jan 2015 5:53AM

https://github.com/dimaursu/diaspora/tree/emoji
Support for unicode emoji is in place. Only MySQL had problems with it, and they are solved now. Pods that used Postgres already supported them.
I'm working on the support for twemoji. It should be done today.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Tue 6 Jan 2015 5:55AM

Here is the mouse :P

C

Camil Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:53AM

Multumim, Dumitru, foarte tare ca faci asta, ma bucur ca exista si romani care se pricep la diaspora* pe-aici :-)

Thanks so much for implementing this, and sorry for the above message in a non-English speaking language ;)

DU

Dumitru Ursu Tue 6 Jan 2015 9:31AM

It's almost there, although I have to find the right hooks, so it will be efficient and the screen will always be up-to-date.

@camil yeah, I will try to bring more romanian/moldovan developers around here. It's a very cool project, it deserves more attention.

Feel free to ping me at dima ceata org, or on IRC, I would be glad to get to know you ;)

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Tue 6 Jan 2015 10:43AM

We already have a thread about that topic: https://www.loomio.org/d/esJaABHn/add-smileys-support

G

goob Tue 6 Jan 2015 12:03PM

And github: issue and pull request.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 2:26PM

@steffenvanbergerem @goob … wtf.

Did you read my original post? Read it.

This is not about emoticon support.
This is not about smileys support.
This is about emoji support.

The Loomio and GitHub discussions are a mess about that. People are complaining that :) should stay :) and not become 🙂. WTF? That's not how emoji works. Can you do that on Twitter? No, and it would be bad if Twitter did that.

Some people seem to have issues with what they call "graphical smileys" or "emoticons", which emojis are not. Personally, I find that opinion irrelevant, because I think it is obviously better in a conversation to be able to see the emojis than to see squares like this: 💳 👻

(You shouldn't be seeing squares, by the way.)

You can make another discussion (like the thread @steffenvanbergerem shared) if what you want is, for example, to replace :heart: with 💗 just like GitHub does. However, I will not support your proposal.

@dumitruursu Oh my! This is exactly what we need. You're damn quick!

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:23PM

@gp I read the introduction to this thread and I think that the goals are similar to the ones in the thread I mentioned. Both try to add support for additional ways to express yourself. @florianstaudacher said in the thread I shared

A separate input method for inserting the unicode emojis (= “text”) with a nice icon font that matches our design could do the trick.

and also others mentioned emojis there. The original post asked to

replace some common signs by smileys

but as I said there are also solutions that were mentioned in the thread.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:26PM

@steffenvanbergerem But as I said, the discussions freely blend the different topics together. This Loomio discussion is focused on supporting emoji characters exclusively, not about input methods.

If you want, we can have a discussion on input methods later after diaspora* supports emojis. If it supports them, of course.

G

Poll Created Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:34PM

Diaspora* should support emoji characters Closed Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:56PM

Outcome
by GP Tue 25 Apr 2017 5:44AM

The discussion trend indicates me that everyone agree that diaspora* should fully support Unicode.

However, further proposals will determine whether certain technologies should be used to display these Unicode characters consistently across all platforms. In other words, if @dumitruursu's work should be merged into Diaspora*.

Yes, I agree: The Unicode emoji characters should be replaced with visually-consistent, cross-compatible visuals. For example, "🐢" would show a turtle on all devices and not only on Android and iOS smartphones.

No, I disagree: The Unicode emoji characters should not be supported by diaspora*. "🐢" should stay an unintelligible square on desktop computers OR should be disallowed from the system.

Results

Results Option % of points Voters
Agree 71.4% 5 EK C Q G TR
Abstain 28.6% 2 JH DS
Disagree 0.0% 0  
Block 0.0% 0  
Undecided 0% 259 BK ST FS MS TS AA S CB HF BO DM GC JH JR F RF M EG G AX

7 of 266 people have voted (2%)

G

GP
Agree
Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:36PM

Emojis are now standard and in 2015, we now have the freedom and open source to make this innovation shine as free software.

G

GP
Agree
Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:39PM

Emojis are now standard and in 2015, we now have the freedom and open source code to make this innovation shine as free software.

JH

Jonne Haß
Abstain
Tue 6 Jan 2015 5:43PM

I would have no problem with including a nice font that supports these, I would not agree with replacing those with images. The proposal is unclear about what should be done.

Q

Quetschwalze
Agree
Tue 6 Jan 2015 5:50PM

I think this is already state of the art and a lot of people are used to this!

C

Camil
Agree
Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:45PM

I think it's a very useful proposals, in many ways.

DS

Dennis Schubert
Abstain
Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:54PM

Yes for keeping the unicode characters, No for replacing them by images.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 4:59PM

Hell, we could even make diaspora* an emoji-only social network!

(That was a joke.)

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Tue 6 Jan 2015 5:37PM

@gp Can you suggest a concrete icon font for emojis that would work well with our design? AFAIK that was the biggest problem so far.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:12PM

@steffenvanbergerem @jhass What are you talking about? It's not a font, but a javascript workaround that replaces the characters with images.

See this example:

Emoji support!

Here is the technology by Twitter.

It works well with any fonts and with any designs.

@jhass What's wrong with replacing those with images? That's what Twitter and WordPress do, and it works like magic.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:14PM

I don't like most emoji image representations in general and haven't seen a single one that would integrate well into Diasporas current design.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:15PM

but a javascript workaround that replaces the characters with images

Better read the proposal again, that's not what it's talking about. If that's really what's meant, I'm gonna have to block it, since then it would be extremely poor worded.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:17PM

@jhass What is the proposal about? You are extremely whimsical.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:22PM

I'm not too sure actually, that's why I abstained. I relate it to making sure that the storage backend can actually store the unicode characters in question, that the post processing does not alter them and maybe to provide some way to make sure they're displayed in one form or the other everywhere. As said I think it's a bit vague, which is why I abstained.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:23PM

Also please refrain from getting ad hominem, that's really not necessary and won't strengthen your position in anyone's eyes.

G

goob Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:23PM

GP, are you the same person as Cam Camil/riderplus (and others)?

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:24PM

@jhass Then please don't make subjective observations that add nothing to the discussion: "I don’t like most emoji image representations in general"

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:25PM

I'm not allowed to express my opinion now?

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:27PM

@jhass The proposal is yet vague because it's about the concept, and not about the technology itself. There are probably multiple ways to achieve this. However, the current preferred method is the one Twitter, WordPress and @dumitruursu are using, which involves replacing the characters with images. That's the only way to achieve this yet, because fonts do not support colors (unless, on desktop computers). Google is working on a font for that (Google Noto Sans), but it's not yet supported.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:31PM

@jhass Of course, but then I also have the right to declare your opinion as "whimsical".

@goob I have no idea who these people are. However, if you are referring to my attitude, it seems like I may not be the only one to feel the same way about diaspora*: I feel like diaspora* is currently being managed by a developer oligarchy which is hindering the UX part of diaspora* from moving forward.

However, consider this as off-topic from the discussion. Also don't take this in consideration when voting for the proposal.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:37PM

@gp I'd like to use an emoji font instead of images. We already switched to an icon font (entypo) and that works really well so far. (except for joindiaspora but that is pod specific) We wouldn't have to replace characters and could just parse the text and add a specific class to some characters to display them with the emoji font.

Just like @jhass I haven't seen an emoji font that would fit our current design.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:39PM

The proposal is yet vague because it’s about the concept, and not about the technology itself.

And I'm saying that such a proposal that doesn't make clear on how to do it and how it would look like, is rather useless and won't add anything to the discussion, as you phrased it.

That’s the only way to achieve this yet, because fonts do not support colors

That assumes "this" is "colored emoji", which is nowhere made clear. Microsoft is doing grayscale emoji since the 90s (see Webdings) and basically 90% of the Unicode Emojis added by Unicode 7 are coming from these.

Of course, but then I also have the right to declare your opinion as “whimsical”.

I think there's an important difference in saying "I don't like X" and "X is okay because Y is Z", with Y being a person and Z being an insult.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:41PM

@steffenvanbergerem Then I suggest that you use the current workaround @dumitruursu is working on instead of waiting for a font to be developed. What matters right now is that emojis are not currently being supported and that most of them can only be viewed on smartphones. There is no such thing as an emoji font yet, except Noto Sans Emoji which is not designed to be a Web font.

Better support any emoji design than no emoji at all.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:46PM

@jhass Relax! Further proposals will make decisions on futher details. The current proposal is to see if it is relevant and important to support emojis, or if it's just a pointless idea. There's no need to come up with a 100% established solution yet (especially because there are more than one complete solution).

Microsoft is now working on full-color emojis.

As you can see, colored emoji fonts are being developed, but only as proprietary and native projects. That's why Twitter's emojis are so good.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:51PM

Better support any emoji design than no emoji at all.

I disagree. While it would be great if we would support emojis (in terms of displaying them with a special font) I still think that implementation and design matters and if that is bad I'd rather wait.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:52PM

There is no such thing as an emoji font yet

I'm on my laptop. I use Firefox.

$ pacman -Qs noto
$

Yet I do not see any squares in the proposal but a turtle. Must be the NSA messing with my computer or somehting...

There’s no need to come up with a 100% established solution yet

Okay, then I'll probably just ignore Loomio from now on and you can find somebody else to merge PRs I disagree with. But I'd rather prefer to not waste my time on voting on even more "I can haz this please" proposals.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:53PM

@steffenvanbergerem If a special font did exist, then right now Twitter and WordPress would not be working on a JavaScript technology.

What's wrong about Twemoji?

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 6:57PM

What’s wrong about Twemoji?

Nothing, the issue is that you're trying to change people's opinions. Some people, including me and apparently Steffen, just don't like the looks of the provided graphical emojis or graphical emojis in general. That's it.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:00PM

@jhass Indeed, you just proved my point that there is no such thing as an emoji font for the web yet.

The turtle is a proof that you're on an unfair system. Most people don't see the turtle, and that's the problem. Diaspora* users should not be forced to use Arch Linux with Noto installed in order to see the turtle.

Okay, then I’ll probably just ignore Loomio from now on and you can find somebody else to merge PRs I disagree with. But I’d rather prefer to not waste my time on voting on even more “I can haz this please” proposals.

As you wish. However, I suggest being patient and let things come when it is time. @dumitruursu is working on a solution. After the first proposal will end, if it is favorable to emojis then another proposal would be created to determine whether his solution should be merged as a temporary workaround. As I said, it would be pointless to just ask everyone "Should be merge @dumitruursu's work?" because we should first decide whether or not we care about emojis.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:05PM

@jhass It doesn't matter if you don't like graphical emojis, since you would only see them when people would want to use them. For example, I don't personally care if "ß" is supported by diaspora* or not, but it has to be supported by diaspora* since some people want to use it.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:09PM

So you're saying I should not follow people because they use emojis I don't like, while I like what they write? I shouldn't express my opinion on them just because I potentially could ignore all people using them? Sorry, but now you're talking bullshit. Also you start to mix topics again, being able to store and deliver the unicode codepoints and replacing them by some alternate representation or even delivering a font that can represent them are very distinct technical aspects.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:10PM

@jhass I'm not saying that.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:12PM

Weird, English is not my native tongue, but my past experience has shown me that my reading comprehension is not too bad.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:12PM

@jhass What I mean is that don't forbid people from expressing themselves with the characters they want because you don't like these characters or the way they are stylized.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:14PM

@jhass I may have used ad hominem for "whimsical" but you are using a condescending attitude which is just as worse.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:19PM

I guess your reality check is broken. I'm not even in the power to forbid that, I'm merely expressing my opinion, which is worth as much as yours or anybody else's. I did not block the proposal, heck I did not even disagree with it. Since we're into the logical fallacies now, you're basically pulling a straw man there.

you are using a condescending attitude which is just as worse

Mmh, I try to avoid logical fallacies and I know I suck at doing so. But Google is not providing much on this one. Can you explain more? Specific examples of where I did that and alternate, better phrasings? Please remember, English is not my native language.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:24PM

@jhass

Weird, English is not my native tongue, but my past experience has shown me that my reading comprehension is not too bad.

You could have written:

Weird, it seems that I have misunderstood what you meant.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:33PM

Weird, it seems that I have misunderstood what you meant.

That's not what I meant there though. I did read your statement several times prior responding and did read it several times again now, I still don't know what you're meaning with that then. And so far you don't seem to want to clarify. One could even argue that with not clarifying in

I’m not saying that.

you were showing condescending attitude first, since you assume that your statement is perfectly clear and I'm just incapable of understanding it. Note that I'm not saying it's unclear, I'm saying it's unclear to me. Which of the two is closer to the truth though, we won't find out with just us two talking.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:35PM

I should clarify, it's unclear to me if my first obvious interpretation is wrong.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:35PM

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:37PM

@jhass Then I guess you really did not understand what I meant. I felt offended because I thought you did. Sorry for such a misinterpretation mess.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:38PM

Direct quote:

What I mean is that don’t forbid people from expressing themselves with the characters they want because you don’t like these characters or the way they are stylized.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:43PM

Well I already answered to the "forbid" part and I made clear that I'm just expressing opinion on the topic a lot earlier. So I still kind of fail to see any misinterpretation of your statements on my part and I kind of have the feeling that you're ignoring statements of mine that you cannot answer, but that might very well be an issue on my side.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:51PM

@jhass The thing is, I don't want to censor anyone and I don't want you to unfollow anyone. It's your choice if you want to unfollow someone because that person uses emojis. What I think matters, and matters to this Loomio discussion, is that diaspora* users should have the choice to use Unicode emojis, even though you don't like emojis, and that these emojis should be replaced with images for cross-compatibility.

C

Camil Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:56PM

@goob

GP are you the same as Cam Camil/riderplus and others

Please be aware that one cannot create clone accounts on Loomio in the first place. Secondly, you can stick your sarcastic remarks where you took them from, if you know what I mean, in a very polite manner :). As @gp stated , you have to read the proposal before posting comments. Thank you.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 7:59PM

@camil Please please please, don't turn this into fire! He will have to realize this by himself in his life, no need to start a war here. You're making it sound as if we are in war against him. And almost as if we are the same person! I can understand what he means.

And yes, it is possible to create multiple accounts on Loomio. Just have multiple email addresses, and Incognito mode in Google Chrome can do the job.

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:02PM

Stop the straw man please, seriously. I never said I don't like emojis. I never said I would block emoji support in general. I did not block this proposal. Assuming I said any of these, as I already said multiple times now before (which is where the feeling comes from that you ignore part of my statements), I do not even have the power to keep them out of Diaspora, I do not own the project.

All I said is that I don't like graphical emojis and that I would vote no on a proposal about adding them. I also said I would block this proposal if it's in fact about providing graphical emojis, since that's not clear from the proposal and thus the proposal is unclear and should be redone. Which would be the reason for blocking the proposal, not my dislike of graphical emojis. Additionally we decided in the early days that a block ultimately just counts as a no vote and is merely meant as an indicator to the involved parties that there's something wrong about the proposal.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:07PM

I don’t like graphical emojis

That's the source of the misinterpretation. I assume "graphical emojis" is a pleonasm since emojis are graphic symbols.

I understand the value of a "block" vote.

Now instead of continue this argument, could you please rephrase the proposal according to your intererpretation?

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:14PM

I feel like I'm repeating myself here, but the entire reason for my abstain is that I'm unclear about what I would agree or disagree about on this proposal, so no I cannot as much as I'd wish to.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:16PM

Here are examples to explain my view of the issue.

Please take a look at this web page.

Scroll down a bit.

Problem #1 is the "turtle example" I gave earlier. Most smartphones do support emojis, but most desktops don't. Setting up a universal "emoji font" or equivalent would solve that issue.

Problem #2 is the "color emoji" example I gave earlier. Emojis have the popular reputation to be very colorful, which is not the case with most emoji fonts on the desktop.

This is why for now, until color emoji fonts get implemented as a standard for desktop and browsers, I think technologies like Emoji One and Twemoji should be used by diaspora* to display emojis consistently.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:17PM

@jhass You seem to have pretty much only disagreed so far. Sorry if I'm wrong, this is not supposed to be offensive but just an observation.

Therefore, could you tell us in details what you agree with?

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:25PM

None that are explicitly mentioned in your proposal, it being too vague with too little details to agree or disagree with is my entire point after all. Saying that some abstract thing, in this case emojis, should work in some abstract way, in this case "be supported", while multiple different and distinct concrete variations that fulfill these requirements exist, is, to me, a waste of time.

I already outlined that, but since we're now in the repeating ourselves phase: I do agree that the storage mechanisms used should be able to store the unicode codepoints used for emojis unaltered. I do agree that we should be able to deliver the unicode codepoints used for emojis unaltered. I do agree that the post parsing should not alter these codepoints. I do agree that we should deliver a nice font being able to represent these codepoints in case we find one that we can use.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:31PM

@jhass Thank you for the clear repetition ;-)

However, could you explain us what "codepoints" and "parsing" are? I am not enough experienced with fonts and Unicode to be familiar with these technical terms.

Also, could I know why you absolutely want it to be a font, and not a system like Twemoji?

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:34PM

@jhass Also, I created the proposal because I thought you opposed emojis. Can I then close this proposal and then assume that we all agree that diaspora* should support emojis?

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:49PM

Unicode is a standard that maps certain values (=numbers) to a meaning. Those mappings are called codepoints. Let's take the turtle as an example: "U+1F422 TURTLE", here we can see the number 128034 (1F422 is its hexadecimal representation) is a codepoint, it has for example the name "TURTLE" associated. That's what it does at this point, it associates a meaning, 128034 should represent a turtle, 41 (U+0041 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A) represents an uppercase latin 'A' and so on.

A font maps symbols or pictograms to codepoints. These days those usually are vector graphics on the technical level.

An encoding specifies how a sequence of codepoints is encoded to a sequence of bytes. A byte is a sequence of 8 bits. A bit can be one of two numbers, 0 and 1, thus 8 bits (= 1 byte) can represent two to the eight numbers, 256 different numbers, 0-255. As you can see Unicode defines a lot more numbers than 256, so you need to combine multiple bytes in a certain way to reach those. An encoding specifies on how to do that. For Unicode the most common encoding is UTF-8.

So to get our turtle from a byte sequence somewhere stored in a database and then transmitted through the internet to your browser, we need to go through these three things. Decode the byte sequence using UTF-8 to Unicode codepoints and then use a font to map those codepoints to some vector graphic.

With post parsing I refer to the process that turns your Markdown into HTML, turns your hashtags into links you can click on, turns your mentions into links you can click on and so on. Things like Twemoji would hook into that process and search for the codepoint of the turtle, then replace it with an HTML image tag or something like that.

And for the last one I just repeat myself once more: I don't like those images, they look to childish and flashy to me and they don't integrate nice into the text flow, since the font rendering system can't influence them. I'm not saying that the fonts look amazingly beautiful, but they look better to me than the image sets I've seen.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 8:56PM

@jhass I see, so there isn't that much of a problem after all. I guess I can go on and close the proposal, assuming that everyone agrees for full Unicode support.

However, we'll now have to decide whether we should merge @dumitruursu's work into Diaspora*.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 9:01PM

So, I guess someone can create a pull request to merge this fork by @dumitruursu into diaspora*?

JH

Jonne Haß Tue 6 Jan 2015 9:05PM

Already done before you even opened your proposal: https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/pull/5530

The technical change is about supporting all of Unicode codepoints, something we most certainly want, it's just rather unnecessarily argued with emoji support, since that's what @dumitruursu was working on while hitting that issue. To add to the confusion he accidentally pushed his twemoji changes to that branch too, which was undone in the meantime though.

G

GP Tue 6 Jan 2015 9:08PM

@jhass Oh! That's nice.

@dumitruursu Can the Twemoji changes be found on another branch though?

DU

Dumitru Ursu Wed 7 Jan 2015 12:31AM

@gp yes, there is another branch https://github.com/dimaursu/diaspora/tree/twemoji ; note - this does not work yet, I could not find the right hooks into the backbone views.

@jhass got it right, I wanted emoji, and it turned out that on a pod with Posgres as the database, unicode emoji worked fine, but MySQL has issue - utf8 in MySQL is misleading, it's not "real" utf8, just a subset, more specifically 3-byte per character UTF, when the standard has 4.

Now, the problems gets a bit more complicated - I did a conversion of the database, and it worked fine - in the meantime, I found a issue while making the database from scratch - MySQL needs a ton of attention to have this feature work properly. I will solve that issue soon.

The "bird's eye view" of the problem is like this:
All is fine when using Postgres, and soon will be like this with MySQL too. That means, in the database, we will have utf-8 strings, emojis included (the simplified ones, not the graphical fancy ones).

To make emojis pretty we then can either:

  1. Patch the font we are using, with something more apealing (that's kinda hard, and the designers will be limited) - it will look similar with FontAwesome, that kind of things.

  2. use a library like twemoji, replacing in the view with img-tags. That's what's happening in the branch I posted above.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 12:41AM

@dumitruursu That's very good work, thank you.

I really want emojis to be cross-platform, and I would prefer them to be colored. However, I admit that it is a preference, and not a necessity. (Though it is a fact that emojis are popularly known to be colored and not monochrome.)

Can font-based emojis be colored? If not, I would support the use of Twemoji.

… but feel free to share all the possible libraries and fonts that we can choose from. For now, I only know Google Noto Emoji (which I think cannot be used), Twemoji (which is used by WordPress and Twitter) and Emoji One.

Apple's emoji characters sure are not open source. I wonder why GitHub uses them…

DU

Dumitru Ursu Wed 7 Jan 2015 12:47AM

Not yet. In the next version of Unicode (now we have version 7, version 8 will have "skin tones").

The only reasonable solution is to use a library like twemoji at this moment. It's the most customizable too, it's way harder to edit fonts.

I can think of another issues with a font-based solution - even if you will never use a emoji in your life, you will have to download a huge font, containing them.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 12:51AM

@dumitruursu True! I know that using a lot of fonts on a website can affect page load. A colored emoji font would take a heck of a time to load…

Customization is an advantage too.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 12:51AM

@dumitruursu Would Twemoji be hosted directly into diaspora* or would it fetch it from Twitter's servers?

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 12:56AM

Are we ready for another Loomio proposal? I would think of something along the lines of…

Diaspora* should replace Unicode emoji characters with images from a library like Twemoji

What do you think? Too vague, too precise? Wrong terms? Too long question? I think we've had enough repetitions in the comments to make the details quite clear to anyone.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Wed 7 Jan 2015 12:58AM

@gp

https://github.com/dimaursu/diaspora/blob/twemoji/app/assets/javascripts/app/models/post/interactions.js#L86

On this line, if we specify a "base" url like so, we use our servers. If we don't, then MaxCDN is used. That's the default, MaxCDN.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 1:00AM

@dumitruursu I see. Such a feature in such a short line, that's wonderful :)

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 4:22PM

Alright, so here are a few samples from Twitter's and WordPress' Twemoji library.

Food!

Faces!

Monkey

Dog

Pig

Frog

Mouse?

Heart

Tulip

Rose

Sunflower

Controller

Party

Rocket

According to WordPress' article, there are 872 emojis converted to images so far.

They were designed by The Iconfactory.

G

Poll Created Wed 7 Jan 2015 4:38PM

Diaspora* should replace Unicode emoji characters with images from a library like Twemoji Closed Mon 19 Jan 2015 4:05PM

Outcome
by GP Tue 25 Apr 2017 5:44AM

Diaspora will, by default, keep Unicode emoji characters as font characters. However, since almost 47.5% of votes support emoji library support, the feature can be offered as an opt-in on an individual basis once it is ready.

Further decisions may discuss about emoji fonts, emoji image libraries, and choice of such technologies.

Agree: You want diaspora* by default to replace Unicode emoji characters such as "🐭" (mouse) with an equivalent image that displays consistently on all platforms (e.g. https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v1/72x72/1f42d.png for the mouse).

Disagree: You want diaspora* by default to keep Unicode emoji characters as font characters, even though that might make some of these characters unintelligible on certain platforms (e.g. "🐢" would look like a square instead of a turtle on some platforms). Further discussion would decide whether a monochrome font should be implemented to support all emojis on all platforms.

Results

Results Option % of points Voters
Agree 47.6% 20 JR T TS C DU LM G RV DU L Y LM A M D M DU C SG C
Abstain 0.0% 0  
Disagree 52.4% 22 FS JH F G RF DS R SVB F S W E J DB A T T S L D
Block 0.0% 0  
Undecided 0% 249 BK ST MS TS AA S CB HF BO DM GC JH RF M EG G AX PC PP BB

42 of 291 people have voted (14%)

RF

Rasmus Fuhse
Disagree
Wed 7 Jan 2015 4:46PM

I like plain letters and dislike, when they are replaced by images.

DU

Dumitru Ursu
Agree
Wed 7 Jan 2015 5:52PM

Colorful emojis are a mean of expression, and as anything else, it could be abused or put to good use. Just like words. I think we should provide this feature to the community, given that it does not pose a bit technical problem.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem
Disagree
Wed 7 Jan 2015 6:14PM

I don't think we should replace chars with images.

M

MrmappyINOF
Agree
Wed 7 Jan 2015 7:20PM

Emojis are pretty much part of most social networks, so why not Diaspora*?

LM

Lucas Meijer
Agree
Wed 7 Jan 2015 10:36PM

I think this would be a nice idea, however I find it very important to use a free software implementation of this that respects the users freedom and doesn't run any javascript from external servers!

DU

Dumitru Ursu
Agree
Thu 8 Jan 2015 5:15AM

Colorful emojis are a mean of expression, and as anything else, they could be used or abused. Just like words. I think we should provide this feature to the community, given that it does not pose a big technical problem.

C

Camil
Agree
Thu 8 Jan 2015 8:18AM

I don't want squares instead of turtles, I'm already tired of squares!

A

Amy
Agree
Thu 8 Jan 2015 12:09PM

Emoji love here. Don't want no squares.

G

goob
Disagree
Fri 9 Jan 2015 7:20PM

No. I also don't think we should replace chars with images.

JR

Jason Robinson
Disagree
Fri 9 Jan 2015 8:33PM

Not a big fan of emojis etc. If this passes it really should be optional for a user.

M

msas
Agree
Sat 10 Jan 2015 6:17PM

I like the emoticons telegram is using. We should use the twitter emoticons too, like wordpress.

S

StefOfficiel
Disagree
Mon 12 Jan 2015 4:34PM

I'm not a fan of emoji like Facebook, but smileys (yellow faces) such as ":-D" become ":-D". I think the good is understood to be on Friendica.

T

Theatre-X
Disagree
Sat 17 Jan 2015 3:14PM

Ehhh, the diaspora plate is already full. We have a lot of other bits to work on.

G

GP
Agree
Sun 18 Jan 2015 3:42AM

It should be an opt-out feature for the users though.

L

Luminocity
Disagree
Sun 18 Jan 2015 5:03PM

Replacing text with images multiplying number of http-requests and traffic is bad. Page with images consume more memory and time to load. Native emoji support in IOS/Android will break. Cliaspora and other text-based browsers will not show them.

D

deppenmagnet
Disagree
Sun 18 Jan 2015 8:00PM

imho emojis are some kind of nice-to-have feature to be developped if and only if there are no other code corrections, features and so on that need the ressources more urgent

JR

Jason Robinson
Agree
Sun 18 Jan 2015 10:20PM

Changing no to yes to keep the vote closer to 50/50 :D

As long as they are opt-in, not opt-out.

JH

Jonne Haß
Disagree
Sun 18 Jan 2015 11:00PM

I still don't think they will integrate well into Diaspora, not even looking at the technical issues.

C

Contex
Agree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 9:51AM

I'm looking forward to it!

LM

Lukas Matt
Agree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 10:10AM

Agree if the user can decide whether he want to display the images or not.

J

jonsger
Disagree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 10:35AM

do it on a client which is independent from the server, so the server's loud doesn't increase

D

davidak
Agree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 12:04PM

since emoji are part of Unicode, they should get displayed properly. if the OS don't support them, they should get replaced with an image but don't corrupt native implementations on smartphones. i like twitters graphics more like "one". low priority

DU

[deactivated account]
Agree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 1:11PM

Same as jasonrobinson, as long as it is opt-in.
Will have to be consistant with chat emoji too.

T

Thor77
Disagree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 3:44PM

Too much unnecessary traffic usage (especially for mobile)

FS

Florian Staudacher
Disagree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 3:50PM

I'd rather we don't have any special handling for emoji.
If you put arbitrary UTF characters in a message and your browser handles them ok, that's fine by me

E

eyefox
Disagree
Mon 19 Jan 2015 3:58PM

I would rather use the client support if availible.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 5:21PM

This emoji font exists but it's not free.

JH

Jonne Haß Wed 7 Jan 2015 5:23PM

I extended the voting time for this one to include two weekends, since it might get rather controversial.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 5:29PM

Could Symbola be used as a web font?

LM

Lucas Meijer Wed 7 Jan 2015 5:41PM

I personally believe the previous decision should have had a longer voting time. Remember that the Diaspora community is global - with that voting time, a lot of people were excluded from voting due to time zone (me being one of them).

Please try to keep this in mind when creating decisions in the future, @gp :)

DU

Dumitru Ursu Wed 7 Jan 2015 5:53PM

s/bit/big/

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 6:04PM

@fraktalizelove Sorry, it was cancelled voluntarily. The voting was already outdated, since Unicode support was already merged into the diaspora* project. I assumed that everyone wanted Unicode support anyway. There isn't any logical reason not to support that.

Therefore, the discussion should be divided in three parts:

  • Should full Unicode character support be added to diaspora*? The answer is obviously yes.

  • Should Unicode emojis be cross-platform? The answer is obviously yes, but emoji web fonts are currently hard to support. This would be an ultimate solution.

  • Should this cross-compatibility issue be corrected by a library of images like Twemoji? This is the current proposal.

@dumitruursu Very well worded. That's exactly what I've tried to say countless times :)

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 6:07PM

The fourth and ultimate question would be:

  • What font or what library should be used to display emoji characters on all platforms? For a font, we still don't know the range of possible choices. For libraries, Emoji One and Twemoji are available, and Twemoji support is currently being implemented by @dumitruursu.
SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Wed 7 Jan 2015 6:25PM

@gp emojisymbols.com looks good but like you said they aren't free. I don't think colored emojis would integrate well in our current design but I'd support a nice, monochrome emoji font if it is free. (as in "free speech," not as in "free beer")

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 6:54PM

@steffenvanbergerem If only we could find a free equivalent…

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 8:52PM

@rasmusfuhse Emojis are characters, not letters. No letter would be replaced with images.

RF

Rasmus Fuhse Wed 7 Jan 2015 9:19PM

Technically they are the same. I find it stupid to have characters in UTF8 that mean like U+26C4 ⛄ "snowman without snow" for example. In my opinion it is not due to encoding to show me a snowman without snow (whatever that might be, a carrot maybe, but that's another question). But even if there is a character that is meaning to be an image like this snowman, it is still a character and should be displayed as a character to the user. Maybe if we think about accessability U+26C4 has better chances to be understood as a snowman without snow than an image of such a snowman has - just think of a screenreader that is not able to read an image, but that might be able to speak the words snowman-without-snow to the blind user, because it actually knows what this character's about.

So I think that images in unicode are stupid, but even if someone thinks that those images might be worth for someone to be part of unicode, those images should not be real images like jpeg-graphics, but still be characters. When some clients have problems displaying U+26C4, it is a client's problem and the software of diaspora should not be responsible to fix other software's bugs. That's my opinion.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 10:25PM

@rasmusfuhse I see, so you consider letters and emojis as being technically the same. That's what I wanted to make clear. I thought you were thinking that markup such as :smile: would be replaced with a smile image, which is not the case.

G

GP Wed 7 Jan 2015 10:46PM

@fraktalizelove The Twemoji library is open source software and as @dumitruursu said, it can be self-hosted if desired.

Here is the Twemoji GitHub repository.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Thu 8 Jan 2015 3:10AM

Also, to make all people happy, we can have an option in Settings to stop the replacement happening, and just let them be unicode chars.

G

GP Thu 8 Jan 2015 3:55AM

@dumitruursu I had the same idea! Thus the "by default" in the proposal. I think those who disagree with the proposal would really appreciate such a feature and I don't see why they should be forced to see colored emoji pictures.

Would that be hard to implement?

DU

Dumitru Ursu Thu 8 Jan 2015 3:58AM

No, definitely not hard to implement.

G

GP Thu 8 Jan 2015 4:02AM

Then…

@rasmusfuhse @augier @steffenvanbergerem What do you think about this idea? Would you still be against the implementation of a Twemoji-like library if the automatic replacement could be disabled with a kind of "switch" in the settings?

RF

Rasmus Fuhse Thu 8 Jan 2015 8:03AM

Well, my disagreeing is not very strong in fact. I have my opinion and I accept it more people like this feature. Personally I would use that switch, but it is another opinion of mine that software should not have too many switches, but just work perfect with standard configuration. So I don't see a need for such a switch.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Thu 8 Jan 2015 8:33AM

I think we are worrying too much about the wrong question. If the need for such a switch will arise, the community will just ask for it. But for now, it is safe to assume that such feature is possible. I don't think that emoji will be such a big problem in the first place.

For those who think that the images do not match the style of diaspora* - worry not, that's only one CSS filter away.
filter: grayscale(90%);
filter: hue-rotate(90deg);

(I know that somewhere in Germany @jhass cries inside because of my comment)

G

GP Thu 8 Jan 2015 4:53PM

@dumitruursu However, please don't make these green aliens the default… They're hurting my eyes! :P

(I don't think that's what he was talking about)

Oh but wait! Does that mean you could make them monochrome?

DU

Dumitru Ursu Thu 8 Jan 2015 4:57PM

Yeah, color-wise - we can make them anything; making them monochrome just means to turn the greyscale filter to 100%
The only thing we cannot change easily - is their shape/style.

G

goob Thu 8 Jan 2015 7:12PM

The only thing we cannot change easily - is their shape/style.

And unfortunately that's what doesn't fit well into Diaspora's UI, regardless of their colour.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Thu 8 Jan 2015 7:53PM

They're supposed to be funny looking symbols, and most emoji that I'm aware of are like that. Phantom Open Emoji have a different style, flatter and a bit edgier. But they are far from "Open" these days, unfortunately. Plus, they only have like.. 50 emojis?
Edit: I had some false assumptions here, look below for a new status on Phantom Open Emoji

G

GP Thu 8 Jan 2015 8:48PM

@dumitruursu Not "funny looking", but expressive. Akin to manga characters.

And I much prefer Twemojis than the Phantom Open ones you're talking about.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Thu 8 Jan 2015 11:34PM

So, with a little inspiration from another pull-request (thanks @abhineet08), I've managed to nail it down a bit.
You can log in here http://188.237.61.218:3000 , to test it, with

user= alice
pass= evankorth

(please don't kill my router, I have a small bandwidth. Also, the server will be stopped periodically, I do all sorts of stuff here). I can guarantee it's existence only tonight, and maybe tomorrow.

At the moment we do not have a UTF-8 char picker, but you can copy them from here:
http://apps.timwhitlock.info/emoji/tables/unicode

Copy-Paste from an existing emoji from the page also works, surprisingly - those guy from twitter did some weird magic, kudos to them.

The changes are here, they are really small, ~10 lines of code
https://github.com/dimaursu/diaspora/tree/twemoji

G

GP Fri 9 Jan 2015 12:54AM

Oh nice, the diaspora* logo lights up when the cursor hovers on it!

Hmm, not sure about the single post view, though. I really like the emojis, but they look too big there. Same problem on the profile page.

Emoji images don't appear in Conversations.

Emojis can be recognized as hashtags. For example, "#🍇" leads to a routing error because it is recognized as the "%3Cimg%20class=%22emoji%22%20draggable=%22false%22%20alt=%22%F0%9F%8D%87%22%20src=%22/assets/twemoji/36x36/1f347.png%22%3E" tag.

Sorry, but I messed up your test account's profile for testing purposes.

Currently, emojis are not replaced for names nor in gender (in the profile page). They are in Bio and Location, but are too big. Notifications should be tested too.

single post view

That double-width separation in Stream page's top bar is still not fixed yet?

No replacement in polls yet.

No replacement in Aspects yet.

Unicode characters are still not supported for the name displayed in the top left of the Stream page.

@rasmusfuhse Actually, I think screenreaders would not have any problem since the characters are not changed in the HTML text. Someone should test it out though (and test out if in normal cases, screenreaders actually recognize emoji characters.

So yes, that's why they can be freely copy-pasted @dumitruursu. It's a visual replacement but not an actual replacement.

Also, I don't think we should care about input methods yet Dumitru. I personally prefer manually going to an external website like Wikipedia or using the native smartphone keyboard when using the mobile version of diaspora*.

I think emojis fit very well with the current design. They kind of fit with any design.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Fri 9 Jan 2015 5:25AM

Actually the "magic" they used is quite simple: they put the UTF8 char in the 'alt' atribute of img - that is the standart, when you hit control+C on a image with an alt atribute, you get the atribute value. So characters are replace with images, but they do it in "standard compliant" way. Screen readers should also be fine because of this, they do read 'alt' tags.

@gp - I've scaled down the images a bit. I've made them bigger on purpose, to show off the emojis. To make other parts of diaspora* work with emoji, I will need help, I'm not familiar with Backbone.

C

Camil Fri 9 Jan 2015 8:36AM

@dumitruursu multumesc, frate, arata extra! :)

Thanks for that, I'd just have two questions:

  1. Is it possible to click on Preview and see the outcome (the blunt emoji representation) to check if you've written it rightly?

  2. is it possible to integrate the set of emojis on a table so that one can just pick up the icon from there and insert it easily in the post?

:clap: #thankyou

DU

Dumitru Ursu Fri 9 Jan 2015 9:18AM

  1. It's possible, though I'm not sure how at the moment. I'm reading some backbone documentation right now.
  2. I think this is a start, here https://github.com/tomer/characterPicker, but it's definitely very brute right now, it would need a lot of tweaking. Maybe a custom picker would be required, I'm not sure.

I think we can make emoji work with copy-paste in most parts of diaspora* by the next version, and then focusing on improvements, like pickers, search through emoji, and so on.

But I'm not the one making the schedule, and there are other parts of diaspora* that cry for attention.

G

GP Fri 9 Jan 2015 6:22PM

I think the emojis really are too big. They should be the same size as the Unicode characters they replace.

JR

Jason Robinson Fri 9 Jan 2015 8:34PM

Sooooo this would be frontend side, right? Not conversions done during posting? Because if this cannot be made opt-out as a user then it's a strong no from me.. If it can be made opt-out, I'm fine to change my no to abstain. Fine if someone wants to see emojis, but I don't ;)

G

GP Fri 9 Jan 2015 9:03PM

@jasonrobinson I guess a switch could be put in Settings.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Sat 10 Jan 2015 4:34AM

I had a discussion with Rei Kagetsuki, the guy behind the Phantom Open Emoji. He did continue the project, which is now called emojidex, https://github.com/emojidex , and he uses a dual license model. We should check it out, maybe we can have a different style emojis after all.

G

GP Sat 10 Jan 2015 4:44AM

@dumitruursu That's more choice, good! Though I don't like it.

C

Camil Sun 11 Jan 2015 12:29PM

@gp did you really check the emojidex website? The emoticons look very nice, more nice than what we currently have. I think @dumitruursu made a good point, since Rei Kagetsuki uses a dual license model.

G

GP Sun 11 Jan 2015 2:40PM

@camillevergara I have, and I really don't like them. A lot of them are too detailed to be recognizable at font size. Take this one for example, the three last sizes are very hard to see, yet they are the three sizes we're aiming for diaspora*.

I suggest that we make a vote after the current proposal, if emojis are accepted.

C

Ca Sun 11 Jan 2015 4:03PM

I think the Telegram Emojis would be nice!

G

GP Mon 12 Jan 2015 3:02AM

@ca1 These emoji characters?

I think they're copyrighted by Apple, so it would be illegal for us to use them.

C

Camil Sun 18 Jan 2015 5:31PM

@luminocity life is bad, isn't it? :)

DU

Dumitru Ursu Sun 18 Jan 2015 6:50PM

@luminocity The argument about http traffic is overrated - those images have a tiny size, 0.60 KB . Unless all your posts are packed with different emoji, I fail to see how is that an issue. Page load time doesn't suffer - the images are replace with JS, it happens after the page was loaded, and "document.ready" has fired. And how will native support for emoji break? That's just spreading FUD, imo.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 18 Jan 2015 7:03PM

One thing that haven't been mentioned yet is the consistency with the emojis in the chat :/

R

Ravenbird Sun 18 Jan 2015 7:29PM

I think this will be a nice feature for the future. But now there are so many other more important things to do.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 18 Jan 2015 9:03PM

The Diaspora Forum has this cool option:

Not sure how difficult if would be to code something like this in to Diaspora?

Everyone is a winner then :)

G

GP Sun 18 Jan 2015 10:00PM

@rich1 Apple and Google Hangouts emojis are copyrighted though.

I can see that the current proposal is essentially a 50-50, no matter what the final outcome is (if it comes up with 17 to 15 for example, it will just have been a matter of timing). It shows that clearly image emojis should be implemented, but clearly there should be an option to disable them… or to enable them.

What I see is that the essential opposition to the proposal is the fact that individual diaspora* users don't like image emojis and don't want to see them in their Stream. Therefore, I don't think there would be any problem in implementing one or multiple image libraries as an opt-out or opt-in feature, as long as the ability to disable the feature gets implemented at the same time as the implementation itself.

That's a lot of words. Sorry.

Now, I think we should discuss about the following subjects:

  1. Should emojis be an opt-in or an opt-out feature?
  2. Should multiple libraries be offered as choice?
  3. Which libraries should be offered?

@rich1 That would be the best implementation I've ever seen. Not only does it offer emojis, not only does it offer to disable them, but it also offers multiple libraries. Could some code from that forum software be imported into diaspora*? I have no idea how development works.

G

goob Sun 18 Jan 2015 10:17PM

rich wrote

temoji

I've always thought that emoji were a smiling pile of shit, and now we have proof in the right-hand column.

JR

Jason Robinson Sun 18 Jan 2015 10:18PM

Should emojis be an opt-in or an opt-out feature?

If the majority says no they should be opt-in for sure :) I doubt a well made pull will be objected to if the majority choice for optness is respected.

G

GP Sun 18 Jan 2015 11:26PM

@jasonrobinson So basically the ideal setup would be like in the screenshot @rich1 shared, but with "None" set as default.

The Diaspora Forums use the Discourse software, doesn't it? Could someone explain me how they legally use the Apple/International emoji images without getting sued for copyright infringement?

RF

Rasmus Fuhse Mon 19 Jan 2015 10:00AM

@ravenbird your reason is probably not a very good one. The question of this decision is not, if other parts of diaspora are any more or less important, but if this particular feature is wanted or not.

DU

[deactivated account] Mon 19 Jan 2015 1:14PM

Oh shit... I think I broke the statu quo :/

G

goob Mon 19 Jan 2015 1:22PM

How about we ask designers within the Diaspora community to design an emoji set that fits in well with the UI, which could then be packaged in a sprite.

G

GP Mon 19 Jan 2015 6:54PM

Is the outcome fair?

RF

Rasmus Fuhse Mon 19 Jan 2015 6:56PM

I guess an opt-in is a fair solution and outcome.

G

goob Tue 20 Jan 2015 12:01PM

Is the outcome fair?

Well, it's opposite to the result of the vote, which was majority against replacing unicode characters with images. So no, I'd say it's not fair.

JR

Jason Robinson Tue 20 Jan 2015 12:32PM

I'd say it's fair, even though strictly it's not what the vote was about. So if someone (@goob?) wants to challenge the outcome then just create a proposal about including an opt-in emoji lib. I'll at least vote for it. But of course the technical solution must be acceptable - voting for something doesn't mean anything will be accepted ;)

C

Camil Tue 20 Jan 2015 12:33PM

Well, it’s opposite to the result of the vote, which was majority against replacing unicode characters with images. So no, I’d say it’s not fair.

It's pretty straightforward: since coming up with an opt-in solution is generally agreed upon, it really doesn't matter that some people disagreed.

On a different note, interestingly enough, the last four ones who disagreed did it at the same time, short before the proposal was closed. Conspiracy theory? :-)

JR

Jason Robinson Tue 20 Jan 2015 12:36PM

It’s pretty straightforward: since coming up with an opt-in solution is generally agreed upon, it really doesn’t matter that some people disagreed.

No, opt-in solutions should also be weighed upon. And this vote clearly had lots of comments on people not wanting even opt-in emojis.

RF

Rasmus Fuhse Tue 20 Jan 2015 12:42PM

It is not the opposite of the result of the vote, since it is not the proposal. The proposal was to change characters with graphics. The outcome says something about an opt-in solution. And I don't think that an opt-in solution would even be worth any proposal since it is simple a bonus feature which shouldn't bother anyone who does not want that.

C

Camil Tue 20 Jan 2015 2:41PM

And I don’t think that an opt-in solution would even be worth any proposal since it is simple a bonus feature which shouldn’t bother anyone who does not want that.

+1 - that's exactly what I meant to say, but I didn't have the right words maybe.

JR

Jason Robinson Tue 20 Jan 2015 2:44PM

If someone wanted to merge in an opt-in email client or an opt-in pacman game - yes it would need to be decided upon, and if anyone objects to an opt-in emoji lib, yes that should be decided upon as well ;)

I'd be surprised if it wouldn't pass so it's not a big deal for emoji supporters :) I'd vote for it at least even though I'd rather be put in hell than activate emojis.

C

Camil Tue 20 Jan 2015 2:55PM

If someone wanted to merge in an opt-in email client or an opt-in pacman game - yes it would need to be decided upon, and if anyone objects to an opt-in emoji lib, yes that should be decided upon as well ;)

You're right about decision making, but I did that with improving the look and feel of podupti.me here and it was somehow useless, because obviously most of the people agreed upon, so :

I’d be surprised if it wouldn’t pass so it’s not a big deal for emoji supporters :)

then there's not much of a need to vote for something that will evidently pass.

I’d vote for it at least even though I’d rather be put in hell than activate emojis.

Well, thank you, at least you care about others' preferences, that's (evidently) a good thing.

F

Faldrian Tue 20 Jan 2015 3:02PM

I think it depends on the kind of opt-in whether this is acceptable or not.
If you as podmin can adjust a parameter (or checkout an additional git to a folder) to include the emoji-lib-thingy and it is off by default, that is ... okay.
If it is off, it should not impact any speed or something of the server.

G

goob Wed 21 Jan 2015 1:50PM

It is not the opposite of the result of the vote, since it is not the proposal. The proposal was to change characters with graphics.

Exactly; and the vote was (as far as I can tell) not to replace characters with images, which is what the outcome says should happen. Therefore it's opposite to the result of the vote.

Opt-in is an entirely separate matter, as it wasn't part of the proposal.

(I bet GP is enjoying this...)

G

GP Wed 21 Jan 2015 9:48PM

@goob Please make a proposal about opt-in image replacement if you disagree with my outcome.

The majority "no" was too weak and the "yes" too strong to abandon the image library feature altogether. My outcome reflected this. If 60% or more of voters had said "no", then it would have been clearer to decide. However, right now the opt-in feature is a way to be fair with the 48% who actually want image emojis to be available on Diaspora, while not affecting the opponents.

48% is significant. Almost as much as 52%.

DU

[deactivated account] Wed 21 Jan 2015 10:01PM

The majority “no” was too weak and the “yes” too strong to abandon the image library feature altogether.

That's not the question. I broke the statu quo to agree an opt-in feature. Not a full agreement. And I was not alone...

G

GP Wed 21 Jan 2015 10:54PM

@augier I'm still open for a new proposal specifically about the opt-in option. However, I won't be the one who creates it.

DU

[deactivated account] Thu 22 Jan 2015 8:19AM

#WTF

DU

[deactivated account] Thu 22 Jan 2015 6:53PM

@augier I’m still open for a new proposal specifically about the opt-in option. However, I won’t be the one who creates it.

So you are going to work on the other proposal ?

G

GP Fri 23 Jan 2015 12:28AM

@augier No. I stop contributing to the Diaspora project today. What I mean is, feel free to continue debating about my emoji proposition from where I stop.

JR

Jason Robinson Fri 23 Jan 2015 7:34AM

No. I stop contributing to the Diaspora project today. What I mean is, feel free to continue debating about my emoji proposition from where I stop.

You stop contributing to a project because you didn't get your way and a few community members challenge the vote and request a vote for opt-in functionality?

Maybe we should just drop all the constraints and give everyone access to push to the repo and everyone can do what they like - who needs governance and working together?

DU

[deactivated account] Fri 23 Jan 2015 9:42AM

Hang on, I'll just go and get some more toys for @GP to throw out of his pram, brb.

C

Camil Sun 25 Jan 2015 4:04PM

@GP if you're doing this, you don't care about what people want. Think about it. There are people interested in emoji, so please finish what you began!

@rich1 I don't see why you'd say that. You discourage people instead of encouraging them to continue what they have to finish.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 25 Jan 2015 5:32PM

I'm confused now :(

I thought you were @GP?

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 25 Jan 2015 7:07PM

@rich1 : It' a trap ! Ruuuuuuuun !

G

goob Sun 25 Jan 2015 9:50PM

Just walk away, chaps; walk away...

C

Camil Mon 26 Jan 2015 12:17PM

@rich1 It's ok, some people learn new things every day. Others don't :)

M

Milan* Sat 28 Feb 2015 7:31PM

I think Diaspora* should have its own nice and discreetly Smilys...

G

goob Wed 4 Mar 2015 6:24PM

I have created a proposal on the wiki about creating our own emoji character set: https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Emoji

I hope that helps move the discussion on.

DU

[deactivated account] Wed 4 Mar 2015 9:03PM

Nice thing. I already told you what I thought. Line two for me, maybe in a smaller size ;)

S

shirish Wed 4 Mar 2015 9:40PM

It all depends. I would have liked even if notecolore was taken.

See https://github.com/treaki/notocolore.git

DU

Dumitru Ursu Mon 16 Mar 2015 3:05PM

@goob I think asking designers doing that for us (designing emoji) it too much. One solution I found out recently is this: using Symbola emoji characters to supplement our default fonts, applying it only to a range of characters. ( http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11395584/fallback-fonts-on-special-characters )

You can see a comparision table here.
http://apps.timwhitlock.info/emoji/tables/unicode

I won't create a proposal, unfortunately. It's quite time consuming, and my opinion is that diaspora* shouldn't be designed this way ( look up designed by committee ).

Hopefully I'll have some time these days to put in action my ideas about designing diaspora*, and then proceed to the next step - taking over the world.

DU

Dumitru Ursu Tue 17 Mar 2015 12:05AM

https://coderwall.com/p/ruv9hq/display-emoji-glyphs-intermingled-with-arbitrary-text
There is a guy who already chopped up the Symbola font, so it would weight less. Nicely done.
Support for unicode ranges is almost there, http://caniuse.com/#search=unicode-range

DU

Dumitru Ursu Mon 23 Mar 2015 4:01PM

Or we could patch the existing font and this way we won't rely on unicode ranges.

FB

Frédéric Bolvin Sat 3 Sep 2016 10:19AM

I would like to see emoji unicodes replaced by images in frontend, like twitter does.
I don't like statements like "it does not fit to the design". Diaspora should stay modern and should keep up with the times.
In my opinion emoji icons fit in every design because it's the thing people know and see this times everywhere.

I also prefer a client side emoji library agains the default browser/system rendering because I totally disagree with the emojis by Android. :sweat_smile:

HP

Hypolite Petovan Sat 3 Sep 2016 6:03PM

Well, emojis were made to avoid image replacement, I don't support image replacement. Besides, you can already change the emojis image on Android without having to change Diaspora* or any other system.