sync with FDAM8 data - Githubissues

jonnybot0 / emoji4unicode

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/emoji4unicode

Apache License 2.0

0 stars 0 forks source link

sync with FDAM8 data #181

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Synchronize with FDAM8 data after 2010-apr WG2 meeting 56.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by markus.icu on 20 Apr 2010 at 11:18

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

r196: mapping changes from N3829 items 10, 12, 13, 15

Original comment by markus.icu on 22 Apr 2010 at 9:29

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

r197: changes from N3828 (FPDAM8 disp. of comments) DE: T1,T2; JP: 
T8,G11d,G11f; US: 
T5a&b,E2

Original comment by markus.icu on 23 Apr 2010 at 11:10

Changed state: Started

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

r198: try better implementation of JP G11f, without disunification

Original comment by markus.icu on 24 Apr 2010 at 4:53

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

r199: changes from N3828 (FPDAM8 disp. of comments) Emoticons via import of 
FDAM8 
NamesList

Original comment by markus.icu on 24 Apr 2010 at 9:33

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

r200: remove obsolete cross reference (should be to U+26A0 now, if anything)

Original comment by markus.icu on 26 Apr 2010 at 4:48

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

I believe I am done. Kat and others, it would be good if you could compare the 
disposition docs with the changes listed here.

Original comment by markus.icu on 27 Apr 2010 at 8:40

Changed state: Fixed

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

r203: remove remnant of temporary change from r197/r198

Original comment by markus.icu on 28 Apr 2010 at 5:39

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

I've kooked at r196, r97, r198, r199, r200, and r203.
The all looked OK and reflect the state of the Emoji proposal after 2010-04-22 
meeting of ISO/SC2/WG2 in San 
Jose, CA.

A word of caution: the verification work is tedious and involves comparing 
several documents to these changes 
submitted here. There may be a human error or omission -- inadvertently. So if 
anyone else has the time to look 
over them, I recommend it. A 2nd or 3rd eye would be really good given a fairly 
large number of changes.

Thanks!

Original comment by katmomoi on 29 Apr 2010 at 5:27

Changed state: Verified

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Looked at r196-r200. Minor glyph difference (emojidata.pdf vs N3838) noted in 
r199, don't think this is a big 
problem. Otherwise looks good.

Original comment by pedb...@apple.com on 7 May 2010 at 7:27