Re: [m17n-list] About lsymbol.mim

[handa]

In article <address@hidden>, विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) 
<address@hidden> writes:

> > >  (asterix-like
> > >   ("*" (delete @0) ("🌹💐❁✽" "⭐🌟💫✨🌠✯" "☀❂✷✸✹☄")))
> >
> > For this, I prepended "★☆" because I think those characters are used
> > more often.
> >
> ​You're mistaken - flowers are far more popular.

Ah, you intended flowers.  I thought they were just symbols resembling a
star shape.  And, actually, ★☆ are not used as emoji, but as normal
symbols to emphasize a part of sentence (at least in Japan).  So, they
are not that popular in the context of twitter or facebook, but are
popular in general.

> The stars should be grouped together too, for user convenience.

"*" is appropriate for flowers, stars, asterisc, etc.  So, how about this
idea?

Make the first group contain most widely used symbols from each
subcategory (i.e. flower, star, asterisc, ...) something like
"🌹💐☆★✽"(?), make the 2nd group contains more flowers, 3rd group
contains more stars, 4th more asteriscs and etc.

> > >  (spiritual
> > >   ("&" (delete @0) ("☸☯♋☬卍卐" "✝☦✙✡☪" "💀☠👹👼😇" "💒⛪")))
> > I'm not sure for this.  Is "&" a good key?  And, first of all, are those
> > symbols really used that frequently?

> 💀☠👹 are quite popular, as http://www.emojitracker.com/ .​ While at it,
> users should be able to type other spiritual characters as well. For
> instance, I really want to use ​卐 (a common ancient Indic symbol used
> in real life letters, homes and statues to indicate prosperity) - yes
> - it's quite widely used by people for a variety of other reasons
> https://twitter.com/hashtag/%E5%8D%90 . It's more the inability to
> type that prevents wider use.

> ​If you're not sure about the shortcut, that's fine - change it once we get
> a better idea. you could just add a comment if you like, saying that ​the
> shortcut is subject to change.

Such a comment doesn't help normal users.  I think we should be more
cautious of breaking backward compatibility.

> > >  (legal
> > >   ("@" (delete @0) ("©®™§")))
> >
> > I removed § (SECTION SIGN) because it's not a legal sign.
> > Perhaps we should find a key for "§".
> >
> The text signs could be grouped together (@ is more indicative of that).
> perhaps we could just rename legal to text_signs?

I think @ is suitable both for legal signs (as it shape) and for text
signs (at it function), and the total number 7 is not that much.  So,
how about showing all of them as this at the moment:

   ("@" (delete @0) ("©®™§¶†‡")))

If we find more symbols suitable to this category, we can move one or
two of text signs to the next group which contains more symbols.

---
K. Handa
address@hidden