Animals and Plants in Egyptian Hieroglyphs

[Crissov]

It has been pointed out that Unicode already contains several pictograms of objects that are also available as emojis. It has been decided to decline L2/15-208 and therefore not make existing hieroglyph characters etc. into emojis but add them separately. Existing sets from actual scripts are however a solid case to build proposals upon or to use for inspiration.

Mammals

• [ ] donkey #232
• [ ] jackal
• [ ] panther (:leopard:)
• [x] hippopotamus #105 (Unicode 11)
• [x] elephant :elephant:
• [x] giraffe :giraffe:
• [ ] oryx
• [ ] gazelle
• [ ] ibex
• [x] goat :goat:
• [x] baboon (:monkey: :monkey_face:)
• [x] hare (:rabbit:)
• [ ] hartebeest

Birds

• [ ] vulture, Egyptian vulture #91
• [ ] buzzard #229
• [ ] falcon #229
• [ ] guinea-fowl
• [ ] hoopoe
• [ ] lawping
• [ ] northern bald ibis, sacred ibis, glossy ibis #344
• [ ] flamingo #92
• [ ] saddle-billed stork #209
• [ ] heron
• [ ] cattle egret
• [ ] ostrich #93
• [ ] cormorant
• [ ] swallow
• [ ] sparrow
• [ ] white-fronted goose #95
• [ ] pintail
• [ ] widgeon
• [ ] quail chick
• [x] duckling :baby_chick: :hatched_chick:
• [ ] plovers
• [ ] crested bird
• [ ] spoonbill

Reptiles etc.

• [x] gecko :lizard:
• [x] turtle :turtle:
• [x] crocodile :crocodile:
• [x] frog :frog:
• [ ] tadpole :frog:
• [x] horned viper :snake:
• [ ] cobra :snake:
• [ ] tilapia

Fish

• [ ] barbel
• [ ] mullet
• [ ] elephant-snout fish
• [ ] Petrocephalus bane
• [ ] puffer :blowfish:
• [ ] catfish #321

Insects etc.

• [ ] dung beetle :beetle:
• [x] bee :bee:
• [ ] fly #150
• [x] locust :crickets:
• [x] centipede :bug:
• [x] shell :shell:

Plants

• [x] palm :palm_tree:
• [ ] lotus :white_flower:
• [ ] papyrus
• [ ] reed
• [ ] rush
• [ ] sedge
• [x] lily :blossom: :fleur_de_lis:
• [ ] flowering sedge
• [ ] emmer :ear_of_rice:

Proposals

• L2/15-208

Standard References

• Unicode Technical Standard 51 “Unicode Emoji” (beta)
• How to propose emojis to Unicode
• Unicode document submission form

[spixi]

The decision of the UTC was correct.

Dingbats, which are intended for text decoration and ornaments may also have a rather strict appearance, but they do not have any meaning. On the other hand, map and transport symbols and smilies may have a meaning, but give the font designer much more freedom.

Hieroglyphs, however, do not qualify to either of these categories, since they are graphemes with a fixed appearance and a fixed meaning. Emoji, however, explicitly are not graphemes as they lack a meaning or a defined appearance and therefore may have different interpretations or their look may vary among different vendors.

But, finally, hieroglyphs are a good source of inspiration for new emoji, no doubt.

[Crissov]

I agree, for what it’s worth.

[burtonsys]

Tilapia is listed as a proposal under reptiles. It is a fish, not a reptile.