The hypothesis was that post-by-email was doing something wacky, but they seem to be coming out the same (though I pasted them in reverse order this second time) so I think it's not a post-by-email thing.
The default DW layout appears to define a font, and that doesn't support emoji brilliantly on all devices, but my brain is tired and won't let me find what font it is.
I don't currently have a style running that is font free to see if it works better on something else :-(
No worries! Mostly it was that someone else observed that there was some
scrambling in email stuff, and I decided to test whether it was likewise
scrambled in inbound emails. Which it is not! Or at least, no further
scrambled than unicode already is...
In theory even if the font specified doesn't define a unicode character, the system should fall back to a font that does. (On most systems there's only one font that actually specifies all those emoji - Apple Color Emoji on a Mac, Segoe UI on Windows, who knows? on Linux.)
If the set font defined the emoji poorly, which would be deliberately trying to screw up, it could block the default font, but that would be beyond mistakes and into actual malicious font design.
Which, I mean, you've got to give someone points for using font design to bring pain and suffering to the world. It's more imaginative than death ray lasers.
Precisely, and to be honest while I'm sure somewhere out there in Linux land there's a blog post explaining what weird defaults they've chosen I really can't be bothered to try to find it. I like Linux, I do, and I think one thing I like is that the utter pointlessness that is the current emoji fad is given the priority it deserves ;-)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
azurelunatic) wrote2016-05-16 07:40 am
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
The hypothesis was that post-by-email was doing something wacky, but they seem to be coming out the same (though I pasted them in reverse order this second time) so I think it's not a post-by-email thing.
no subject
I don't currently have a style running that is font free to see if it works better on something else :-(
no subject
No worries! Mostly it was that someone else observed that there was some scrambling in email stuff, and I decided to test whether it was likewise scrambled in inbound emails. Which it is not! Or at least, no further scrambled than unicode already is...
no subject
If the set font defined the emoji poorly, which would be deliberately trying to screw up, it could block the default font, but that would be beyond mistakes and into actual malicious font design.
Which, I mean, you've got to give someone points for using font design to bring pain and suffering to the world. It's more imaginative than death ray lasers.
no subject
Precisely, and to be honest while I'm sure somewhere out there in Linux land there's a blog post explaining what weird defaults they've chosen I really can't be bothered to try to find it. I like Linux, I do, and I think one thing I like is that the utter pointlessness that is the current emoji fad is given the priority it deserves ;-)
no subject
(I also like Linux, and make my living from it. Just not on my workstations. :D )
no subject
no subject
And all three look different (and colorful!) on gmail comment I posted notification.
no subject
no subject
I assume I get HTML?
no subject
no subject