Icon Naming Specification proposal - add "<3" to emotes

Hi Greg,

For "<3" I think it would probably be better to convert it to ♥ instead
of showing an icon. (\x2665) IS there any particularly good reason that
we shouldn't be encouraging that behavior instead of using an icon?
(FWIW, I believe FaceBook/etc... sites do this already as well.)

On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 11:37 -0500, Greg Grossmeier wrote:
> Hello Rodney,
>
[snip]


Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:11:10 -0500
From: Greg Grossmeier <greg at grossmeier.net>
To: Rodney Dawes <dobey.pwns at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Icon Naming Specification proposal - add "<3" to emotes

<quoting name="Rodney Dawes" date="2010-02-24" time="14:03:41 -0500">
> Hi Greg,
>
> For "<3" I think it would probably be better to convert it to ♥ instead
> of showing an icon. (\x2665) IS there any particularly good reason that
> we shouldn't be encouraging that behavior instead of using an icon?

Interesting proposal.

My response would be "but that is not how any other IM clients do it" and
by "any other" I mean gtalk, pidgin, and adium.

And, wouldn't that also suggest that we should convert ":)" to ☺ (Unicode
#263A) instead of an icon?

I guess I'm saying: if we convert these things to icons normally, lets
continue to do so.

Thanks for your quick response,

Greg

---- END EMAIL THREAD ----


I would also like to add another point now that I have re-read this: I 
would suggest against Unicode conversion because not all fonts support 
all Unicode elements and might not support ♥ or ☺, so making all 
emoticons actual images would be the safest way to implement this by the 
IM applications (Empathy in this case).

All the best,

Greg

--
|       Greg Grossmeier |
| http://grossmeier.net |