Hubbry Logo
Miscellaneous Symbols and PictographsMiscellaneous Symbols and PictographsMain
Open search
Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs
Community hub
Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs
Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs
Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs
RangeU+1F300..U+1F5FF
(768 code points)
PlaneSMP
ScriptsCommon
Symbol setsEmoji
Assigned768 code points
Unused0 reserved code points
Unicode version history
6.0 (2010)529 (+529)
6.1 (2012)533 (+4)
7.0 (2014)742 (+209)
8.0 (2015)766 (+24)
9.0 (2016)768 (+2)
Unicode documentation
Code chart ∣ Web page
Note: [1][2]
This article contains Unicode emoticons or emoji. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of the intended characters.

Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs is a Unicode block containing meteorological and astronomical symbols, emoji characters[3] largely for compatibility with Japanese telephone carriers' implementations of Shift JIS, and characters originally from the Wingdings and Webdings fonts found in Microsoft Windows.

Block

[edit]
Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs[1]
Official Unicode Consortium code chart (PDF)
  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
U+1F30x 🌀 🌁 🌂 🌃 🌄 🌅 🌆 🌇 🌈 🌉 🌊 🌋 🌌 🌍 🌎 🌏
U+1F31x 🌐 🌑 🌒 🌓 🌔 🌕 🌖 🌗 🌘 🌙 🌚 🌛 🌜 🌝 🌞 🌟
U+1F32x 🌠 🌡 🌢 🌣 🌤 🌥 🌦 🌧 🌨 🌩 🌪 🌫 🌬 🌭 🌮 🌯
U+1F33x 🌰 🌱 🌲 🌳 🌴 🌵 🌶 🌷 🌸 🌹 🌺 🌻 🌼 🌽 🌾 🌿
U+1F34x 🍀 🍁 🍂 🍃 🍄 🍅 🍆 🍇 🍈 🍉 🍊 🍋 🍌 🍍 🍎 🍏
U+1F35x 🍐 🍑 🍒 🍓 🍔 🍕 🍖 🍗 🍘 🍙 🍚 🍛 🍜 🍝 🍞 🍟
U+1F36x 🍠 🍡 🍢 🍣 🍤 🍥 🍦 🍧 🍨 🍩 🍪 🍫 🍬 🍭 🍮 🍯
U+1F37x 🍰 🍱 🍲 🍳 🍴 🍵 🍶 🍷 🍸 🍹 🍺 🍻 🍼 🍽 🍾 🍿
U+1F38x 🎀 🎁 🎂 🎃 🎄 🎅 🎆 🎇 🎈 🎉 🎊 🎋 🎌 🎍 🎎 🎏
U+1F39x 🎐 🎑 🎒 🎓 🎔 🎕 🎖 🎗 🎘 🎙 🎚 🎛 🎜 🎝 🎞 🎟
U+1F3Ax 🎠 🎡 🎢 🎣 🎤 🎥 🎦 🎧 🎨 🎩 🎪 🎫 🎬 🎭 🎮 🎯
U+1F3Bx 🎰 🎱 🎲 🎳 🎴 🎵 🎶 🎷 🎸 🎹 🎺 🎻 🎼 🎽 🎾 🎿
U+1F3Cx 🏀 🏁 🏂 🏃 🏄 🏅 🏆 🏇 🏈 🏉 🏊 🏋 🏌 🏍 🏎 🏏
U+1F3Dx 🏐 🏑 🏒 🏓 🏔 🏕 🏖 🏗 🏘 🏙 🏚 🏛 🏜 🏝 🏞 🏟
U+1F3Ex 🏠 🏡 🏢 🏣 🏤 🏥 🏦 🏧 🏨 🏩 🏪 🏫 🏬 🏭 🏮 🏯
U+1F3Fx 🏰 🏱 🏲 🏳 🏴 🏵 🏶 🏷 🏸 🏹 🏺 🏻 🏼 🏽 🏾 🏿
U+1F40x 🐀 🐁 🐂 🐃 🐄 🐅 🐆 🐇 🐈 🐉 🐊 🐋 🐌 🐍 🐎 🐏
U+1F41x 🐐 🐑 🐒 🐓 🐔 🐕 🐖 🐗 🐘 🐙 🐚 🐛 🐜 🐝 🐞 🐟
U+1F42x 🐠 🐡 🐢 🐣 🐤 🐥 🐦 🐧 🐨 🐩 🐪 🐫 🐬 🐭 🐮 🐯
U+1F43x 🐰 🐱 🐲 🐳 🐴 🐵 🐶 🐷 🐸 🐹 🐺 🐻 🐼 🐽 🐾 🐿
U+1F44x 👀 👁 👂 👃 👄 👅 👆 👇 👈 👉 👊 👋 👌 👍 👎 👏
U+1F45x 👐 👑 👒 👓 👔 👕 👖 👗 👘 👙 👚 👛 👜 👝 👞 👟
U+1F46x 👠 👡 👢 👣 👤 👥 👦 👧 👨 👩 👪 👫 👬 👭 👮 👯
U+1F47x 👰 👱 👲 👳 👴 👵 👶 👷 👸 👹 👺 👻 👼 👽 👾 👿
U+1F48x 💀 💁 💂 💃 💄 💅 💆 💇 💈 💉 💊 💋 💌 💍 💎 💏
U+1F49x 💐 💑 💒 💓 💔 💕 💖 💗 💘 💙 💚 💛 💜 💝 💞 💟
U+1F4Ax 💠 💡 💢 💣 💤 💥 💦 💧 💨 💩 💪 💫 💬 💭 💮 💯
U+1F4Bx 💰 💱 💲 💳 💴 💵 💶 💷 💸 💹 💺 💻 💼 💽 💾 💿
U+1F4Cx 📀 📁 📂 📃 📄 📅 📆 📇 📈 📉 📊 📋 📌 📍 📎 📏
U+1F4Dx 📐 📑 📒 📓 📔 📕 📖 📗 📘 📙 📚 📛 📜 📝 📞 📟
U+1F4Ex 📠 📡 📢 📣 📤 📥 📦 📧 📨 📩 📪 📫 📬 📭 📮 📯
U+1F4Fx 📰 📱 📲 📳 📴 📵 📶 📷 📸 📹 📺 📻 📼 📽 📾 📿
U+1F50x 🔀 🔁 🔂 🔃 🔄 🔅 🔆 🔇 🔈 🔉 🔊 🔋 🔌 🔍 🔎 🔏
U+1F51x 🔐 🔑 🔒 🔓 🔔 🔕 🔖 🔗 🔘 🔙 🔚 🔛 🔜 🔝 🔞 🔟
U+1F52x 🔠 🔡 🔢 🔣 🔤 🔥 🔦 🔧 🔨 🔩 🔪 🔫 🔬 🔭 🔮 🔯
U+1F53x 🔰 🔱 🔲 🔳 🔴 🔵 🔶 🔷 🔸 🔹 🔺 🔻 🔼 🔽 🔾 🔿
U+1F54x 🕀 🕁 🕂 🕃 🕄 🕅 🕆 🕇 🕈 🕉 🕊 🕋 🕌 🕍 🕎 🕏
U+1F55x 🕐 🕑 🕒 🕓 🕔 🕕 🕖 🕗 🕘 🕙 🕚 🕛 🕜 🕝 🕞 🕟
U+1F56x 🕠 🕡 🕢 🕣 🕤 🕥 🕦 🕧 🕨 🕩 🕪 🕫 🕬 🕭 🕮 🕯
U+1F57x 🕰 🕱 🕲 🕳 🕴 🕵 🕶 🕷 🕸 🕹 🕺 🕻 🕼 🕽 🕾 🕿
U+1F58x 🖀 🖁 🖂 🖃 🖄 🖅 🖆 🖇 🖈 🖉 🖊 🖋 🖌 🖍 🖎 🖏
U+1F59x 🖐 🖑 🖒 🖓 🖔 🖕 🖖 🖗 🖘 🖙 🖚 🖛 🖜 🖝 🖞 🖟
U+1F5Ax 🖠 🖡 🖢 🖣 🖤 🖥 🖦 🖧 🖨 🖩 🖪 🖫 🖬 🖭 🖮 🖯
U+1F5Bx 🖰 🖱 🖲 🖳 🖴 🖵 🖶 🖷 🖸 🖹 🖺 🖻 🖼 🖽 🖾 🖿
U+1F5Cx 🗀 🗁 🗂 🗃 🗄 🗅 🗆 🗇 🗈 🗉 🗊 🗋 🗌 🗍 🗎 🗏
U+1F5Dx 🗐 🗑 🗒 🗓 🗔 🗕 🗖 🗗 🗘 🗙 🗚 🗛 🗜 🗝 🗞 🗟
U+1F5Ex 🗠 🗡 🗢 🗣 🗤 🗥 🗦 🗧 🗨 🗩 🗪 🗫 🗬 🗭 🗮 🗯
U+1F5Fx 🗰 🗱 🗲 🗳 🗴 🗵 🗶 🗷 🗸 🗹 🗺 🗻 🗼 🗽 🗾 🗿
Notes
1.^ As of Unicode version 17.0

Emoji

[edit]

The block contains 637 emoji[4][5] and has 312 standardized variants defined to specify emoji-style (U+FE0F VS16) or text presentation (U+FE0E VS15) for 156 base characters. [6]

Emoji variation sequences
U+ 1F30D 1F30E 1F30F 1F315 1F31C 1F321 1F324 1F325 1F326 1F327 1F328 1F329
default presentation emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji text text text text text text text
base code point 🌍 🌎 🌏 🌕 🌜 🌡 🌤 🌥 🌦 🌧 🌨 🌩
base+VS15 (text) 🌍︎ 🌎︎ 🌏︎ 🌕︎ 🌜︎ 🌡︎ 🌤︎ 🌥︎ 🌦︎ 🌧︎ 🌨︎ 🌩︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🌍️ 🌎️ 🌏️ 🌕️ 🌜️ 🌡️ 🌤️ 🌥️ 🌦️ 🌧️ 🌨️ 🌩️
U+ 1F32A 1F32B 1F32C 1F336 1F378 1F37D 1F393 1F396 1F397 1F399 1F39A 1F39B
default presentation text text text text emoji text emoji text text text text text
base code point 🌪 🌫 🌬 🌶 🍸 🍽 🎓 🎖 🎗 🎙 🎚 🎛
base+VS15 (text) 🌪︎ 🌫︎ 🌬︎ 🌶︎ 🍸︎ 🍽︎ 🎓︎ 🎖︎ 🎗︎ 🎙︎ 🎚︎ 🎛︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🌪️ 🌫️ 🌬️ 🌶️ 🍸️ 🍽️ 🎓️ 🎖️ 🎗️ 🎙️ 🎚️ 🎛️
U+ 1F39E 1F39F 1F3A7 1F3AC 1F3AD 1F3AE 1F3C2 1F3C4 1F3C6 1F3CA 1F3CB 1F3CC
default presentation text text emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji text text
base code point 🎞 🎟 🎧 🎬 🎭 🎮 🏂 🏄 🏆 🏊 🏋 🏌
base+VS15 (text) 🎞︎ 🎟︎ 🎧︎ 🎬︎ 🎭︎ 🎮︎ 🏂︎ 🏄︎ 🏆︎ 🏊︎ 🏋︎ 🏌︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🎞️ 🎟️ 🎧️ 🎬️ 🎭️ 🎮️ 🏂️ 🏄️ 🏆️ 🏊️ 🏋️ 🏌️
U+ 1F3CD 1F3CE 1F3D4 1F3D5 1F3D6 1F3D7 1F3D8 1F3D9 1F3DA 1F3DB 1F3DC 1F3DD
default presentation text text text text text text text text text text text text
base code point 🏍 🏎 🏔 🏕 🏖 🏗 🏘 🏙 🏚 🏛 🏜 🏝
base+VS15 (text) 🏍︎ 🏎︎ 🏔︎ 🏕︎ 🏖︎ 🏗︎ 🏘︎ 🏙︎ 🏚︎ 🏛︎ 🏜︎ 🏝︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🏍️ 🏎️ 🏔️ 🏕️ 🏖️ 🏗️ 🏘️ 🏙️ 🏚️ 🏛️ 🏜️ 🏝️
U+ 1F3DE 1F3DF 1F3E0 1F3ED 1F3F3 1F3F5 1F3F7 1F408 1F415 1F41F 1F426 1F43F
default presentation text text emoji emoji text text text emoji emoji emoji emoji text
base code point 🏞 🏟 🏠 🏭 🏳 🏵 🏷 🐈 🐕 🐟 🐦 🐿
base+VS15 (text) 🏞︎ 🏟︎ 🏠︎ 🏭︎ 🏳︎ 🏵︎ 🏷︎ 🐈︎ 🐕︎ 🐟︎ 🐦︎ 🐿︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🏞️ 🏟️ 🏠️ 🏭️ 🏳️ 🏵️ 🏷️ 🐈️ 🐕️ 🐟️ 🐦️ 🐿️
U+ 1F441 1F442 1F446 1F447 1F448 1F449 1F44D 1F44E 1F453 1F46A 1F47D 1F4A3
default presentation text emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji
base code point 👁 👂 👆 👇 👈 👉 👍 👎 👓 👪 👽 💣
base+VS15 (text) 👁︎ 👂︎ 👆︎ 👇︎ 👈︎ 👉︎ 👍︎ 👎︎ 👓︎ 👪︎ 👽︎ 💣︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 👁️ 👂️ 👆️ 👇️ 👈️ 👉️ 👍️ 👎️ 👓️ 👪️ 👽️ 💣️
U+ 1F4B0 1F4B3 1F4BB 1F4BF 1F4CB 1F4DA 1F4DF 1F4E4 1F4E5 1F4E6 1F4EA 1F4EB
default presentation emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji
base code point 💰 💳 💻 💿 📋 📚 📟 📤 📥 📦 📪 📫
base+VS15 (text) 💰︎ 💳︎ 💻︎ 💿︎ 📋︎ 📚︎ 📟︎ 📤︎ 📥︎ 📦︎ 📪︎ 📫︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 💰️ 💳️ 💻️ 💿️ 📋️ 📚️ 📟️ 📤️ 📥️ 📦️ 📪️ 📫️
U+ 1F4EC 1F4ED 1F4F7 1F4F9 1F4FA 1F4FB 1F4FD 1F508 1F50D 1F512 1F513 1F549
default presentation emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji text emoji emoji emoji emoji text
base code point 📬 📭 📷 📹 📺 📻 📽 🔈 🔍 🔒 🔓 🕉
base+VS15 (text) 📬︎ 📭︎ 📷︎ 📹︎ 📺︎ 📻︎ 📽︎ 🔈︎ 🔍︎ 🔒︎ 🔓︎ 🕉︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 📬️ 📭️ 📷️ 📹️ 📺️ 📻️ 📽️ 🔈️ 🔍️ 🔒️ 🔓️ 🕉️
U+ 1F54A 1F550 1F551 1F552 1F553 1F554 1F555 1F556 1F557 1F558 1F559 1F55A
default presentation text emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji
base code point 🕊 🕐 🕑 🕒 🕓 🕔 🕕 🕖 🕗 🕘 🕙 🕚
base+VS15 (text) 🕊︎ 🕐︎ 🕑︎ 🕒︎ 🕓︎ 🕔︎ 🕕︎ 🕖︎ 🕗︎ 🕘︎ 🕙︎ 🕚︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🕊️ 🕐️ 🕑️ 🕒️ 🕓️ 🕔️ 🕕️ 🕖️ 🕗️ 🕘️ 🕙️ 🕚️
U+ 1F55B 1F55C 1F55D 1F55E 1F55F 1F560 1F561 1F562 1F563 1F564 1F565 1F566
default presentation emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji emoji
base code point 🕛 🕜 🕝 🕞 🕟 🕠 🕡 🕢 🕣 🕤 🕥 🕦
base+VS15 (text) 🕛︎ 🕜︎ 🕝︎ 🕞︎ 🕟︎ 🕠︎ 🕡︎ 🕢︎ 🕣︎ 🕤︎ 🕥︎ 🕦︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🕛️ 🕜️ 🕝️ 🕞️ 🕟️ 🕠️ 🕡️ 🕢️ 🕣️ 🕤️ 🕥️ 🕦️
U+ 1F567 1F56F 1F570 1F573 1F574 1F575 1F576 1F577 1F578 1F579 1F587 1F58A
default presentation emoji text text text text text text text text text text text
base code point 🕧 🕯 🕰 🕳 🕴 🕵 🕶 🕷 🕸 🕹 🖇 🖊
base+VS15 (text) 🕧︎ 🕯︎ 🕰︎ 🕳︎ 🕴︎ 🕵︎ 🕶︎ 🕷︎ 🕸︎ 🕹︎ 🖇︎ 🖊︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🕧️ 🕯️ 🕰️ 🕳️ 🕴️ 🕵️ 🕶️ 🕷️ 🕸️ 🕹️ 🖇️ 🖊️
U+ 1F58B 1F58C 1F58D 1F590 1F5A5 1F5A8 1F5B1 1F5B2 1F5BC 1F5C2 1F5C3 1F5C4
default presentation text text text text text text text text text text text text
base code point 🖋 🖌 🖍 🖐 🖥 🖨 🖱 🖲 🖼 🗂 🗃 🗄
base+VS15 (text) 🖋︎ 🖌︎ 🖍︎ 🖐︎ 🖥︎ 🖨︎ 🖱︎ 🖲︎ 🖼︎ 🗂︎ 🗃︎ 🗄︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🖋️ 🖌️ 🖍️ 🖐️ 🖥️ 🖨️ 🖱️ 🖲️ 🖼️ 🗂️ 🗃️ 🗄️
U+ 1F5D1 1F5D2 1F5D3 1F5DC 1F5DD 1F5DE 1F5E1 1F5E3 1F5E8 1F5EF 1F5F3 1F5FA
default presentation text text text text text text text text text text text text
base code point 🗑 🗒 🗓 🗜 🗝 🗞 🗡 🗣 🗨 🗯 🗳 🗺
base+VS15 (text) 🗑︎ 🗒︎ 🗓︎ 🗜︎ 🗝︎ 🗞︎ 🗡︎ 🗣︎ 🗨︎ 🗯︎ 🗳︎ 🗺︎
base+VS16 (emoji) 🗑️ 🗒️ 🗓️ 🗜️ 🗝️ 🗞️ 🗡️ 🗣️ 🗨️ 🗯️ 🗳️ 🗺️

Emoji modifiers

[edit]

The Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs contains a set of "Emoji modifiers" which are modifier characters intended to represent skin colour based on the Fitzpatrick scale (but conflating the two lightest skin types into one category):[5][7]

U+1F3FB 🏻 EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-1-2
U+1F3FC 🏼 EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-3
U+1F3FD 🏽 EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-4
U+1F3FE 🏾 EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-5
U+1F3FF 🏿 EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-6

These emoji modifiers can be used on emojis that represent people or body parts including the 55 human emojis in the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictograph block.[5]

In August 2014, Peter Edberg of Apple Inc. and Mark Davis of Google proposed implementing these "emoji modifiers" to provide better representation of "human diversity" in emoji characters.[8] [9] and, in June 2015, the proposal was adopted in Unicode version 8.0.[10] This was the result of lobbying by Katrina Parrott, whose daughter came up with the idea after being unable to send emojis that looked like her.[11]

To modify an emoji representing a human or body part, the emoji modifier must be placed immediately after that emoji. [12] When the emoji modifier is applied to an emoji, the emoji-style variant selectior (U+FE0F) should be omitted because the emoji modifier automatically implies emoji-style presentation.[12]

Table of emoji with modifiers

[edit]

The following table shows the full combinations of each of the five modifiers with all the "human emoji" characters in the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block. Each character should show in each of the five skin tones provided a suitable font is installed on the system and the rendering software is capable of handling modifier characters. Platforms without emoji modifier support may show as boxes.

Human emoji
U+ 1F385 1F3C2 1F3C3 1F3C4 1F3C7 1F3CA 1F3CB 1F3CC 1F442 1F443 1F446
emoji 🎅 🏂 🏃 🏄 🏇 🏊 🏋️ 🏌️ 👂 👃 👆
FITZ-1-2 🎅🏻 🏂🏻 🏃🏻 🏄🏻 🏇🏻 🏊🏻 🏋🏻 🏌🏻 👂🏻 👃🏻 👆🏻
FITZ-3 🎅🏼 🏂🏼 🏃🏼 🏄🏼 🏇🏼 🏊🏼 🏋🏼 🏌🏼 👂🏼 👃🏼 👆🏼
FITZ-4 🎅🏽 🏂🏽 🏃🏽 🏄🏽 🏇🏽 🏊🏽 🏋🏽 🏌🏽 👂🏽 👃🏽 👆🏽
FITZ-5 🎅🏾 🏂🏾 🏃🏾 🏄🏾 🏇🏾 🏊🏾 🏋🏾 🏌🏾 👂🏾 👃🏾 👆🏾
FITZ-6 🎅🏿 🏂🏿 🏃🏿 🏄🏿 🏇🏿 🏊🏿 🏋🏿 🏌🏿 👂🏿 👃🏿 👆🏿
U+ 1F447 1F448 1F449 1F44A 1F44B 1F44C 1F44D 1F44E 1F44F 1F450 1F466
emoji 👇 👈 👉 👊 👋 👌 👍 👎 👏 👐 👦
FITZ-1-2 👇🏻 👈🏻 👉🏻 👊🏻 👋🏻 👌🏻 👍🏻 👎🏻 👏🏻 👐🏻 👦🏻
FITZ-3 👇🏼 👈🏼 👉🏼 👊🏼 👋🏼 👌🏼 👍🏼 👎🏼 👏🏼 👐🏼 👦🏼
FITZ-4 👇🏽 👈🏽 👉🏽 👊🏽 👋🏽 👌🏽 👍🏽 👎🏽 👏🏽 👐🏽 👦🏽
FITZ-5 👇🏾 👈🏾 👉🏾 👊🏾 👋🏾 👌🏾 👍🏾 👎🏾 👏🏾 👐🏾 👦🏾
FITZ-6 👇🏿 👈🏿 👉🏿 👊🏿 👋🏿 👌🏿 👍🏿 👎🏿 👏🏿 👐🏿 👦🏿
U+ 1F467 1F468 1F469 1F46B 1F46C 1F46D 1F46E 1F46F 1F470 1F471 1F472
emoji 👧 👨 👩 👫 👬 👭 👮 👯 👰 👱 👲
FITZ-1-2 👧🏻 👨🏻 👩🏻 👫🏻 👬🏻 👭🏻 👮🏻 👯🏻 👰🏻 👱🏻 👲🏻
FITZ-3 👧🏼 👨🏼 👩🏼 👫🏼 👬🏼 👭🏼 👮🏼 👯🏼 👰🏼 👱🏼 👲🏼
FITZ-4 👧🏽 👨🏽 👩🏽 👫🏽 👬🏽 👭🏽 👮🏽 👯🏽 👰🏽 👱🏽 👲🏽
FITZ-5 👧🏾 👨🏾 👩🏾 👫🏾 👬🏾 👭🏾 👮🏾 👯🏾 👰🏾 👱🏾 👲🏾
FITZ-6 👧🏿 👨🏿 👩🏿 👫🏿 👬🏿 👭🏿 👮🏿 👯🏿 👰🏿 👱🏿 👲🏿
U+ 1F473 1F474 1F475 1F476 1F477 1F478 1F47C 1F481 1F482 1F483 1F485
emoji 👳 👴 👵 👶 👷 👸 👼 💁 💂 💃 💅
FITZ-1-2 👳🏻 👴🏻 👵🏻 👶🏻 👷🏻 👸🏻 👼🏻 💁🏻 💂🏻 💃🏻 💅🏻
FITZ-3 👳🏼 👴🏼 👵🏼 👶🏼 👷🏼 👸🏼 👼🏼 💁🏼 💂🏼 💃🏼 💅🏼
FITZ-4 👳🏽 👴🏽 👵🏽 👶🏽 👷🏽 👸🏽 👼🏽 💁🏽 💂🏽 💃🏽 💅🏽
FITZ-5 👳🏾 👴🏾 👵🏾 👶🏾 👷🏾 👸🏾 👼🏾 💁🏾 💂🏾 💃🏾 💅🏾
FITZ-6 👳🏿 👴🏿 👵🏿 👶🏿 👷🏿 👸🏿 👼🏿 💁🏿 💂🏿 💃🏿 💅🏿
U+ 1F486 1F487 1F48F 1F491 1F4AA 1F574 1F575 1F57A 1F590 1F595 1F596
emoji 💆 💇 💏 💑 💪 🕴️ 🕵️ 🕺 🖐️ 🖕 🖖
FITZ-1-2 💆🏻 💇🏻 💏🏻 💑🏻 💪🏻 🕴🏻 🕵🏻 🕺🏻 🖐🏻 🖕🏻 🖖🏻
FITZ-3 💆🏼 💇🏼 💏🏼 💑🏼 💪🏼 🕴🏼 🕵🏼 🕺🏼 🖐🏼 🖕🏼 🖖🏼
FITZ-4 💆🏽 💇🏽 💏🏽 💑🏽 💪🏽 🕴🏽 🕵🏽 🕺🏽 🖐🏽 🖕🏽 🖖🏽
FITZ-5 💆🏾 💇🏾 💏🏾 💑🏾 💪🏾 🕴🏾 🕵🏾 🕺🏾 🖐🏾 🖕🏾 🖖🏾
FITZ-6 💆🏿 💇🏿 💏🏿 💑🏿 💪🏿 🕴🏿 🕵🏿 🕺🏿 🖐🏿 🖕🏿 🖖🏿

Additional human emoji can be found in other Unicode blocks: Dingbats, Emoticons, Miscellaneous Symbols, Supplemental Symbols and Pictographs, Symbols and Pictographs Extended-A and Transport and Map Symbols.

History

[edit]

The following Unicode-related documents record the purpose and process of defining specific characters in the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block:

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs is a in the Supplementary Multilingual Plane, encompassing code points from U+1F300 to U+1F5FF, that primarily encodes pictographic symbols such as meteorological icons (e.g., 🌀, 🌁), astronomical signs, and a substantial set of emoji-like characters derived from early Japanese mobile carrier standards for . Introduced in version 6.0 released in 2010 with an initial 529 characters, the block has expanded across subsequent versions to include 768 assigned code points by Unicode 17.0, reflecting ongoing efforts to standardize diverse visual glyphs for global digital text interchange. Its contents facilitate expressive, non-verbal communication in computing environments, bridging traditional symbols with modern pictographs while prioritizing over proprietary formats. Key defining characteristics include the integration of and celestial motifs alongside compatibility emojis, which predate broader emoji standardization and underscore the block's role in evolving text-based media toward multimodal representation without supplanting core script encoding principles.

Technical Specifications

Block Allocation and Code Points

The Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block spans the Unicode code point range U+1F300 to U+1F5FF within the Supplementary Multilingual Plane (Plane 1), comprising exactly 768 consecutive positions calculated as (0x1F5FF - 0x1F300) + 1. This allocation was established in 6.0, with the standard's core specification finalized and published on , 2010. The block's structure supports a mix of assigned characters—encoding specific symbols and pictographs—and unassigned (reserved) s held for potential future encoding, as documented in the official Unicode code charts. Unicode Consortium policies enforce strict stability on code point assignments to prevent reallocation: once a code point receives a permanent character encoding, it cannot be reassigned to a different semantic entity, a measure designed to uphold backward compatibility across software implementations and data interchange. Reserved code points within the block similarly adhere to these rules, prohibiting their use for incompatible purposes that could disrupt existing text processing, thereby ensuring long-term reliability in multilingual environments. Distinct from predecessor blocks like Miscellaneous Symbols (U+2600–U+26FF), which encodes 256 code points for diverse graphical elements such as weather and zodiac icons introduced in earlier Unicode versions, the later allocation at U+1F300–U+1F5FF expands capacity for pictographic content without overlapping prior ranges. This separation facilitates organized extension of the repertoire while maintaining compatibility with legacy systems limited to the Basic Multilingual Plane.

Character Properties and Categories

The characters in the Unicode block Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs (U+1F300–U+1F5FF), allocated since 6.0 in October 2010, predominantly receive the General_Category value "So" (Symbol, Other), classifying them as non-alphabetic symbols suitable for decorative, pictorial, or representational uses in text streams. This property distinguishes them from alphabetic scripts or control characters, enabling software to process them as atomic units for tasks like font selection and layout without alphabetic shaping. A subset of these characters, including weather icons like U+1F300 and astronomical symbols like U+1F319 CRYSCENT MOON, are annotated with the Emoji=Yes property, signaling their default presentation as colorful, graphical in compliant environments rather than monochrome text variants. Non-emoji symbols within the block, such as alchemical notations in U+1F700–U+1F77F (e.g., U+1F70C ALCHEMICAL SYMBOL FOR DAY) and geometric shapes in U+1F780–U+1F7FF (e.g., U+1F7E0 HEAVY CIRCLE), lack the Emoji property and remain as "So" symbols, prioritizing compatibility with technical diagrams over emotive rendering. Bidirectional properties for block characters are uniformly set to Bidi_Class=ON (Other Neutral), treating them as directionally neutral elements that do not initiate or override text directionality in mixed left-to-right and right-to-left contexts, thus preserving layout integrity in internationalized software. Decomposition types are absent for the majority, with no or compatibility mappings, ensuring these symbols maintain their encoded form without normalization to base components. Certain variation selectors, though not resident in the block itself, interact via properties like Default_Ignorable_Code_Point=No for primary glyphs but Yes for selectors (e.g., U+FE0F), allowing selective emoji-style rendering without altering core character identity. These collectively promote by standardizing behaviors in searching, , and rendering across diverse systems; for instance, "So" enables efficient indexing of symbols like U+1F4A9 PILE OF POO in full-text searches, while Emoji=Yes flags trigger platform-specific graphical substitutions, reducing discrepancies in cross-script document processing. Empirical data from confirms that such categorizations minimize rendering errors, with over 700 assigned code points in the block relying on these traits for consistent global deployment as of Unicode 17.0 in September 2024.

Contents and Categorization

Primary Symbol Groups

The Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs (U+1F300–U+1F5FF) organizes its 768 assigned characters into thematic clusters that support the encoding of natural and abstract phenomena, enabling consistent digital representation across systems. Primary groups include weather and symbols, which depict atmospheric conditions and celestial bodies, originating from proposals for standardized pictographic compatibility in early emoji sets. These approximately 30 characters, spanning U+1F300–U+1F32F, facilitate causal modeling of environmental states in text-based interfaces, such as cyclone (U+1F300 🌀), cloud with rain (U+1F327 🌧), and crescent moon (U+1F319 🌙). Timepieces form another core group, with around 24 symbols in U+1F550–U+1F567 representing clock faces and related devices to denote temporal progression without reliance on numeric scripts. Examples include clock face one o'clock (U+1F550 🕐), clock face twelve o'clock (U+1F55B 🕛), and mantelpiece clock (U+1F570 🕰), drawn from historical clock iconography adapted for universal digital use. Arrows and directional symbols, totaling about 10 in ranges like U+1F519–U+1F51D, provide navigational cues, such as back with leftwards arrow (U+1F519 🔙) and top with upwards arrow (U+1F51D 🔝), enhancing logical flow in diagrams and user interfaces. Extended geometric shapes, roughly 15 characters around U+1F532–U+1F53F, extend basic forms with fills and shadows for visual emphasis, including black square button (U+1F532 🔲), large red circle (U+1F534 🔴), and lower right shadowed white circle (U+1F53E). Complementing these, alchemical symbols in the adjacent block (U+1F700–U+1F773, part of 128 total alchemical characters) encode historical processes and substances from medieval texts, proposed for digitizing works like Isaac Newton's to preserve esoteric notations without modern interpretation bias. Groups here cover elements (e.g., air U+1F701 🜁) and operations (e.g., sublimation U+1F75E 🝞), rooted in empirical alchemical practices rather than symbolic reinvention. These clusters collectively prioritize fidelity to source traditions, such as ISO-derived astronomical motifs in sky symbols, over interpretive variation.

Detailed Character Inventory

The Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block in Standard Version 17.0 allocates all 768 code points from U+1F300 to U+1F5FF to specific characters, comprising pictographic symbols without unassigned gaps within the range. Each entry includes a unique formal name, , and properties such as General Category "So" (Other Symbol) for most, enabling textual representation of visual icons like weather patterns, landscapes, and objects. No deprecated characters or withdrawn proposals affect this block in Version 17.0, maintaining empirical completeness as documented in the official code charts. For verification and lookup, the full inventory is detailed in the Unicode Consortium's PDF chart for the block, which lists each code point sequentially with glyphs and names. Representative examples include:
Code PointCharacterName
U+1F300🌀
U+1F301🌁FOGGY
U+1F302🌂CLOSED UMBRELLA
U+1F303🌃NIGHT WITH STARS
U+1F5FA🗺️WORLD MAP
U+1F5FB🗻MOUNTAIN
U+1F5FC🗼
U+1F5FD🗽
U+1F5FE🗾SILHOUETTE OF
U+1F5FF🗿
This structure ensures exhaustive coverage, with properties verifiable via the Unicode Character Database files, prioritizing textual rigor over visual embedding.

Emoji Elements

Emoji Characters in the Block

The Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs (U+1F300–U+1F5FF) encompasses numerous characters with the Emoji=Yes property, distinguishing them as pictographs suitable for colorful, illustrative rendering rather than abstract, text-like symbols. These primarily represent visual motifs such as celestial and atmospheric phenomena, terrestrial features, and ornamental designs, facilitating compact depiction of concepts that enhance textual communication. Examples include U+1F308 (🌈, ), symbolizing an arc of spectral colors across the sky, and U+1F30B (🌋, ), illustrating an erupting mountain with lava flow. Other notable entries cover (U+1F301, 🌁), closed umbrellas (U+1F302, 🌂), and decorative patterns like cyclones (U+1F300, 🌀), totaling over 500 assigned code points where most qualify as due to their inherent pictographic intent. Fundamentally, these characters function as visual shorthands, prioritizing efficient conveyance of ideas through imagery over verbal description, a principle rooted in practical constraints of early digital interfaces. Originating from Japanese mobile carrier innovations rather than ideological movements, emerged with NTT DoCoMo's platform in February 1999, where engineer developed an initial 176 12x12-pixel icons—including weather and landscape symbols—to enrich short message service () on monochrome screens limited to 150 Japanese characters. This approach addressed real-world needs for nuance in constrained environments, predating global standardization by over a decade. In contemporary usage, these block-specific emoji contribute to expressive text by substituting or augmenting words, with metrics indicating over 10 billion daily uses worldwide across platforms, predominantly in messaging applications where 92% of users integrate them to clarify tone and . Unlike non-emoji symbols in the block, such as certain alchemical notations, these pictographs default to graphical presentation via variation selectors, ensuring vivid depiction on compliant systems while maintaining as fallback glyphs.

Presentation and Variation Selectors

Variation Selector-15 (VS15, U+FE0E) and Variation Selector-16 (VS16, U+FE0F) provide mechanisms to specify text or presentation for Unicode characters capable of both styles. VS15 requests a text , typically a simple black-and-white outline suitable for semantic or directional uses, while VS16 requests a colorful with stylized, often whimsical features. These invisible, non-spacing selectors form variation sequences with a preceding base character, influencing rendering only when the base supports dual presentations as defined by the Emoji_Presentation property. Characters defaulting to text presentation (Emoji_Presentation=No) require VS16 to display as emoji, whereas those defaulting to emoji (Emoji_Presentation=Yes) use VS15 to revert to text; absent a selector, the default applies. This applies to symbols in the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block, such as the warning sign (U+26A0 ⚠, text default with VS16 for ⚠️) or white heavy check mark (U+2705, emoji default with VS15 for text), enabling precise control over style to avoid altering established meanings in legacy text. The selectors originated with variation mechanisms in earlier Unicode versions but gained emoji-specific stability in Version 6.0 (October 2010), which formalized emoji properties and guaranteed unchanging defaults to support ; subsequent versions, like 6.1, expanded supported sequences without retroactive changes. This stability prevents "emoji-ification" of symbols historically used as , such as arrows (e.g., U+27A1 ➡️ with VS16 versus plain →), preserving causal intent in contexts like diagrams or navigation where color could introduce unintended visual noise. Vendor implementations exhibit empirical inconsistencies, with some fonts or systems ignoring selectors and falling back to defaults, as support depends on font capabilities and rendering engines; for instance, older platforms may uniformly render text style despite VS16, undermining sequence reliability. Unicode guidelines recommend selectors only when necessary to override defaults, mitigating fallback risks while acknowledging that full cross-vendor adherence remains incomplete.

Modifiers and Combinations

Emoji Modifier Mechanism

The emoji modifier mechanism enables the customization of select emoji characters, designated as emoji modifier bases, through concatenation with dedicated modifier characters, primarily to represent variations in skin tone without requiring separate code points for each variant. The skin tone modifiers, comprising five characters in the range U+1F3FB (Fitzpatrick type 1-2, light) through U+1F3FF (type 6, dark), reside within the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block and adhere to the originally developed for dermatological classification in 1975. Introduced in 8.0, released on June 17, 2015, this system addressed the inefficiency of allocating individual code points for diverse representations, which would exponentially increase the emoji repertoire and complicate encoding maintenance. An emoji modifier sequence forms when a compatible base emoji immediately precedes a modifier, yielding a single grapheme cluster that rendering systems display as a unified, modified emoji; incompatible pairings result in separate display of the components. Unicode's normalization and processes, as defined in the Unicode Standard, treat these sequences as , ensuring consistent handling in text processing, searching, and sorting algorithms— for instance, under the Default Unicode Collation Algorithm (DUCET), the sequence collates equivalently to a hypothetical single . Within the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block, modifier bases are limited to human anatomical elements such as (U+1F442), (U+1F443), (U+1F444), and certain hand gestures (e.g., U+1F44D thumbs up), reflecting the block's focus on pictographic symbols rather than complete figures, which appear in adjacent blocks like Emoticons or . This constraint prevents broad applicability, with only explicitly flagged characters in the Unicode data files accepting modifiers to avoid unintended combinations. Gender modifications, distinct yet complementary, utilize zero-width joiner (ZWJ, U+200D) sequences to link base emoji with gendered variants, such as professions or roles, forming emoji ZWJ sequences that platforms render as composite glyphs. Proposed for standardization in 2016 and integrated progressively from Unicode 9.0 onward, this method extends the modifier paradigm by inserting the invisible ZWJ between elements, maintaining sequence integrity without visible spacing and similarly avoiding code point proliferation— a base like health worker (U+1F469) can thus sequence as female (U+1F469 U+200D U+2640 U+FE0F) or male variants. Limitations parallel those of skin tone modifiers: support is confined to predefined combinations recommended for general interchange, with collation treating the full sequence as a unit, though non-standard inputs may fallback to disjoint rendering.

Examples of Modified Emoji

The Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs includes a limited set of with the Emoji_Modifier_Base property, enabling combination with Fitzpatrick skin tone modifiers (U+1F3FB–U+1F3FF) to produce toned variants of body part symbols. These primarily encompass facial and limb features such as (U+1F442), (U+1F443), (U+1F444), and foot (U+1F463), added in 6.0 (2010) for ear, nose, and mouth, and 9.0 (2016) for foot. Sequences form via immediate , yielding 5 distinct tones per base (light to dark). Such modifications are empirically rare within the block's 768 code points, confined to 4–6 bases amid predominantly non-modifiable symbols like cyclones (U+1F300) or arrows (U+1F800–U+1F8FF), reflecting targeted use for anatomical expressivity rather than general pictographs.
Base EmojiCode PointExample Modifier SequenceTechnical Outcome
👂 EarU+1F442U+1F442 U+1F3FB (light skin tone)Renders as unified glyph with adjusted hue on modifier-aware systems (e.g., iOS 8.3+, Android 4.4+); fragments to base plus isolated modifier (🏻) on legacy renderers.
👃 NoseU+1F443U+1F443 U+1F3FD (medium skin tone)Combines into single emoji presentation where supported; defaults to sequential display otherwise, increasing parsing complexity.
👄 MouthU+1F444U+1F444 U+1F3FF (dark skin tone)Yields toned variant as atomic unit in compliant fonts; non-support leads to disjointed appearance, per Unicode conformance tests.
🦶 FootU+1F463U+1F463 U+1F3FC (medium-light skin tone)Integrates modifier for cohesive rendering on post-2016 platforms; older systems show separate symbols, highlighting interoperability gaps.
These sequences enhance granularity for the specified bases but introduce rendering variability, as empirical cross-platform tests show consistent combination only on systems implementing Emoji 1.0+ modifier handling (introduced 2015). Non-anthropomorphic symbols in the block, such as clock faces (U+1F550–U+1F567), lack modifier compatibility, underscoring the mechanism's selective scope.

Historical Development

Pre-Unicode Origins

Alchemical symbols, which form a significant of the block's precursors, emerged in medieval European manuscripts as cryptic notations for substances, operations, and concepts in proto-chemical practices. These symbols, often derived from planetary associations and theories, were compiled in lists circulating from around 1100 CE, attributed to earlier Greco-Egyptian influences but standardized in Latin alchemical texts by the . Such notations prioritized brevity and secrecy, reflecting the empirical trial-and-error methods of alchemists who documented transmutations without reliance on verbal descriptions alone. Meteorological and astronomical icons trace to 19th-century scientific communication, where telegraph networks enabled rapid data exchange, necessitating compact visual for weather phenomena. Meteorologists developed line-based symbols for formations—such as cumulus as clustered curves and stratus as horizontal streaks—to annotate synoptic charts from simultaneous observations across stations. These precursors emphasized causal representation of atmospheric dynamics, like pressure gradients implied by isobar curves, facilitating predictive mapping before numerical dominated. Geometric symbols in , including arrows, chevrons, and basic shapes, evolved from ancient practical measurements to abstract proofs, with foundational forms appearing in Mesopotamian clay tablets circa 2000 BCE for land surveying and Egyptian papyri for pyramid proportions. By the , Euclid's around 300 BCE formalized circles, triangles, and lines as diagrammatic tools for theorems on congruence and similarity. In during the 1990s, mobile carriers pioneered pictographic sets amid bandwidth constraints, with NTT DoCoMo launching i-mode in February 1999 featuring 176 12x12-pixel symbols designed by to encode emotions, weather, and objects in SMS-like messaging. This empirical response to textual limitations—evident in over 170 symbols per early set—drove visual augmentation of communication, converging disparate analog traditions toward digital universality without formal encoding.

Standardization Process

The standardization of the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block followed the Unicode Consortium's rigorous proposal submission and framework, overseen by the Unicode Technical Committee (UTC) in collaboration with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2. Proposers must furnish concrete evidence of character need, including documentation of attested usage in production systems, frequency data, and imperatives, to substantiate inclusion beyond speculative or promotional rationales. This empirical threshold ensures additions address genuine encoding gaps rather than unverified demands, with the UTC empowered to defer or reject submissions deficient in such substantiation. A pivotal submission, document L2/09-114 (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 N3607) dated April 6, 2009, originated from Japanese national body representatives and targeted the encoding of pictographic symbols employed as in domestic mobile ecosystems. Drawing from proprietary sets developed by carriers including , , and SoftBank—deployed commercially since 1999—the proposal cataloged over 700 glyphs with usage metrics derived from active network traffic and device implementations, advocating rearrangement and expansions to enable global text interchange without proprietary fallbacks. These contributions underscored a data-centric approach, prioritizing symbols with proven deployment volumes in over abstract representational ideals. Following UTC evaluation, the block received approval for integration into Version 6.0, with encoding confined to those elements demonstrating distinct utility and avoiding duplication of extant symbols in prior blocks like (U+2600–U+26FF). Redundant or low-evidence proposals were systematically declined to preserve the standard's compactness and cross-system reliability, reflecting a commitment to causal encoding necessities—such as mitigating in international messaging—over expansive novelty. This process, devoid of mandates for ideological balance, hinged on quantifiable criteria like compatibility testing outcomes and vendor adoption logs.

Version-Specific Additions

The Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block (U+1F300–U+1F5FF) was established in 6.0, released on October 11, 2010, introducing approximately 529 pictographic symbols and characters to support in digital text, drawn from established usage in systems like Japanese mobile networks. These initial assignments focused on categories such as weather icons, celestial bodies, and decorative motifs, allocated based on documented needs rather than speculative trends. Unicode 7.0, released on June 16, 2014, expanded the block's utility by incorporating additional compatible with emerging modifier sequences, including around 250 new pictographs across related areas to address evidenced gaps in symbol representation from vendor proposals. This update prioritized empirical demand from global usage data submitted via formal ballots to the Technical Committee, ensuring additions aligned with existing text processing behaviors without disrupting stability. Subsequent versions from 9.0 (June 2016) through 17.0 (September 2024) introduced minor allocations to previously unassigned code points within the block, such as refinements around U+1F5FF for specific cultural icons like the moai statue, totaling 768 assigned characters by the latest release. These incremental changes adhered to Unicode's encoding stability policies, which restrict modifications to assigned code points to prevent backward incompatibility, with approvals contingent on verifiable evidence of widespread demand from proposal processes rather than transient cultural shifts. No major structural expansions occurred post-7.0, reflecting the policy's emphasis on conserving the block's integrity for long-term text stability.

Usage, Reception, and Impact

Adoption in Computing and Communication

The adoption of symbols from the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs in began with their integration into mobile messaging platforms in the early , following Unicode's inclusion of characters starting in version 6.0 in 2010. Initially developed for Japanese mobile phones by in 1999 to convey visual non-verbal cues in text-limited environments, these symbols addressed practical needs for expressive communication on early cellular networks like . Their standardization enabled cross-platform portability, leading to rapid uptake in applications such as Apple's , launched with emoji support in on October 12, 2011, and , which added full emoji functionality in 2011. Usage has since expanded exponentially, with over 10 billion from this and related blocks transmitted daily across global digital communications as of 2023. For instance, Messenger alone processes 5 billion per day, reflecting empirical growth tracked through platform analytics and frequency , where symbols like icons and pictographs rank among the most frequently used for enhancing textual intent without . This proliferation stems from 's role in supplementing linguistic limitations, particularly in informal digital exchanges, with adoption metrics showing a 775% increase in overall use from 2015 to 2018 across messaging services. In accessibility contexts, computing systems parse these symbols via built-in Unicode descriptions, allowing screen readers like and NVDA to vocalize them as descriptive phrases—e.g., "smiling face with heart-eyes"—to convey meaning to visually impaired users. This mechanism supports inclusive communication by mapping pictographs to textual equivalents, though effective parsing depends on proper implementation in software, enabling non-sighted users to interpret enhanced non-verbal elements in messages.

Cross-Platform Rendering Differences

The rendering of characters in the (U+1F300–U+1F5FF) exhibits notable variations across platforms, as vendors such as Apple, , and develop their own designs independently. These differences manifest in stylistic choices, including color palettes, line weights, and proportions, since the Standard defines only the characters' semantics and code points, not their precise visual forms. This policy of non-prescriptive rendering permits innovation in font implementation but inherently produces inconsistencies, such as a symbol appearing vibrant and detailed on one system versus simplified or grayscale on another. A primary source of variance stems from support for variation selectors, where characters paired with selector-16 (U+FE0F) are intended for emoji-style rendering—typically colorful and pictorial—while selector-15 (U+FE0E) cues text-style monochrome outlines. Platforms like and modern Android generally honor these selectors for full-color display via color fonts (e.g., Apple's Color Emoji or Google's Blobmoji equivalents), but Windows or certain web browsers may default to black-and-white glyphs if color font fallback fails or the selector is unsupported, altering perceived vibrancy and scalability. Size discrepancies also arise, as some implementations scale symbols to fit emoji grids (e.g., 1.5x em height), while others treat them as standard text, impacting layout in mixed-content documents. Such decentralized rendering fosters vendor-specific aesthetics—Apple's often photorealistic, Google's more illustrative—but empirically contributes to communication friction, as users may interpret the same differently based on their device's font stack. Studies of cross-platform confirm that while core semantics remain intact in over 90% of cases per conformance data, stylistic divergences lead to varied emotional inferences in edge scenarios, like ambiguous pictographs rendered abstractly versus concretely. This technical realism underscores that uniformity is not a Unicode mandate, prioritizing at the code level over visual harmony.

Controversies and Criticisms

Debates on Representation and Diversity

The introduction of skin tone modifiers in 8.0 in June enabled variation for human figures, drawing from the Fitzpatrick dermatological scale to allow five additional tones beyond the default , addressing perceptions of underrepresentation in earlier sets where neutral figures dominated and were critiqued for insufficient reflection of global demographics. This change followed advocacy highlighting empirical gaps, such as surveys indicating user demand for options mirroring diverse populations, with proponents arguing it expanded expressive utility without altering core symbols. Advocates maintain these modifiers enhance inclusivity, with a 2018 study of posts finding that diverse tone selections correlated with reduced exclusionary perceptions among users, fostering broader participation in digital expression. However, critics from various perspectives question the extent of such expansions; left-leaning analyses describe them as superficial neoliberal gestures that tokenize diversity while preserving underlying power structures, repackaging racial categories into consumable icons without deeper systemic change. Right-leaning viewpoints contend that persistent pushes for gender-neutral or racially varied redesigns impose ideological conformity on a originally apolitical system, prioritizing over practical universality, as seen in proposals for fragmented family or profession variants that risk diluting emoji's role as simple, cross-cultural shorthand. Empirical data reveals limited adoption of modifiers beyond Western contexts, with analyses of billions of tweets showing and defaults heavily influencing usage patterns, where non-Western users often default to for neutrality rather than customized tones. This aligns with emoji's Japanese origins in 1999, created by for as concise, fun pictographs for mobile messaging without activist intent, emphasizing functional brevity over representational politics. Despite controversies, such as the 2018 ADL-designated "OK hand" gesture falsely amplified as a hate symbol, has refrained from removals, preserving symbols' integrity amid debates favoring evidence-based continuity over reactive alterations.

Technical Challenges and Interoperability Issues

Modifier sequences, such as those combining base with skin tone modifiers or zero-width joiners (ZWJ) in the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block, demand advanced rendering engines and font support to display as unified glyphs; absent this, they decompose into disparate components, often appearing as separate symbols or placeholders that confuse interpretation. For instance, unsupported ZWJ sequences like family groupings (e.g., 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦) render as individual human figures rather than a cohesive image, a failure mode prevalent in legacy text processors or terminals lacking handling. environments prior to ES6 string updates exacerbate this by treating supplementary characters as surrogate pairs, inflating perceived lengths and disrupting indexing. Interoperability falters across platforms due to vendor-specific implementations, where emoji from this block exhibit inconsistent visual forms, aspect ratios, or even omissions in older systems like pre-utf8mb4 databases that truncate 4-byte code points. A 2018 survey of 710 users revealed 25% unawareness of these variances, with 20% indicating they would edit or withhold emoji-laden messages upon recognition, underscoring practical rendering discrepancies in real-time communication. Terminal emulators further compound issues, assigning single-cell widths to double-wide emoji, yielding overlaps or misalignments in applications like VTE or . The block's expansion, incorporating hundreds of pictographs alongside sequence-dependent variants, amplifies code point density and processing overhead, straining memory and computation in constrained devices through bloated font files and complex grapheme cluster algorithms. Critics argue this prioritizes expressive proliferation over parsimonious design, as the Consortium's stability policies—barring reallocation, removal, or disruptive changes to encoded characters—reject or alternative precomposed forms despite compatibility trade-offs. Such rigidity preserves textual integrity but perpetuates inefficiencies, with implementers compelled to support obsolete sequences indefinitely.

References

  1. https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1F300.pdf
  2. https://codepoints.net/miscellaneous_symbols_and_pictographs?lang=en
  3. https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.0.0/
  4. https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/block/U%2B1F300
  5. https://symbl.cc/en/unicode/blocks/miscellaneous-symbols-and-pictographs/
  6. https://www.unicode.org/policies/stability_policy.html
  7. https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2600.pdf
  8. https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr44/#General_Category_Values
  9. https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#def_emoji
  10. https://www.unicode.org/emoji/charts/full-emoji-list.html
  11. https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1F700.pdf
  12. https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/#Decomposition_Mapping
  13. https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#variation_selector
  14. https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr44/#Properties
  15. https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode17.0.0/
  16. https://www.unicode.org/Public/17.0.0/ucd/UnicodeData.txt
  17. https://www.unicode.org/charts/
  18. https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/
  19. https://www.moma.org/collection/works/196070
  20. https://www.fastcompany.com/90168415/the-untold-design-story-of-the-original-emoji
  21. https://www.sixthcitymarketing.com/emoji-statistics/
  22. https://unicode.org/reports/tr51/
  23. https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/latest/emoji-variation-sequences.txt
  24. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2014/14213-skin-tone-mod.pdf
  25. https://unicode-org.github.io/unicode-reports/tr52/tr52.html
  26. http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16181-gender-zwj-sequences.pdf
  27. https://unicode.org/emoji/charts/full-emoji-modifiers.html
  28. https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/47754/what-is-the-origin-of-the-symbols-for-the-four-elements-used-in-alchemy
  29. https://www.thoughtco.com/alchemy-in-the-middle-ages-1788253
  30. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/100/12/bams-d-19-0071.1.xml
  31. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Cloud-and-Weather-Symbols-in-the-Historic-Language-Houze-Houze/787c3712669437c83b8f676b68d19332dad17b42
  32. https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Miller/mathsym/
  33. https://nrich.maths.org/articles/geometry-history-practice-abstraction
  34. https://www.unicode.org/pending/proposals.html
  35. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2009/09114-n3607-emoji.pdf
  36. http://www.unicode.org/versions/beta-6.0.0.html
  37. https://www.alanwood.net/unicode/miscellaneous-symbols-and-pictographs.html
  38. https://www.unicode.org/charts/nameslist/c_1F300.html
  39. http://blog.unicode.org/2014/06/announcing-unicode-standard-version-70.html
  40. https://www.babelstone.co.uk/Blog/2013/10/whats-new-in-unicode-70.html
  41. https://bytebridge.medium.com/emojis-a-digital-communication-evolution-47a313e30ef4
  42. https://www.wired.com/story/guide-emoji/
  43. https://emojipedia.org/stats
  44. https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2023/07/17/world-emoji-day-2023-list-of-most-used-emojies/70419464007/
  45. https://home.unicode.org/emoji/emoji-frequency/
  46. https://www.amraandelma.com/facts-emoji-and-statistics/
  47. https://www.boia.org/blog/emojis-and-web-accessibility-best-practices
  48. https://readabilityguidelines.co.uk/images/emojis/
  49. https://uxcontent.com/accessible-content-design-for-emojis/
  50. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/technology/personaltech/the-wide-world-of-emoji.html
  51. https://blog.jim-nielsen.com/2013/unicode-symbols-and-font-stacks/
  52. https://www.brenthecht.com/publications/cscw2018_emojiimpact.pdf
  53. https://grouplens.org/site-content/uploads/ICWSM16_Emoji-Final_Version.pdf
  54. https://blog.emojipedia.org/2015-the-year-of-emoji-diversity/
  55. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/24/apple-adds-racially-diverse-emoji-and-they-come-in-five-skin-shades
  56. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/emoji-skin-tone-inclusion-culture-spd
  57. https://www.on-culture.org/journal/issue-14/emojis-and-the-neoliberal-coding-of-diversity/
  58. https://www.wired.com/2015/11/emoji-diversity-politics-culture/
  59. https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/files/475195666/EmojiAreEffectivePredictors_final_pub_vers_con_contrib_.pdf
  60. https://blog.emojipedia.org/no-the-ok-hand-is-not-a-symbol-of-white-power/
  61. https://eev.ee/blog/2015/09/12/dark-corners-of-unicode/
  62. https://brhfl.com/2020/02/unicode-bloat/
  63. https://www.unicode.org/policies/stability.html
  64. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2006/06106-stability.pdf
  65. https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr44/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.