> What their meaning is isn't too important. If someone thinks that there is
> enough interchange to warrant encoding in the UCS, they can certainly submit
> a proposal to encode them.
> Of course, in some particular cases there may be questions of unification
> with already-encoded characters or of possible rejection on the grounds that
> a symbol is no more than a cipher-presentation of some already-encoded
For this reason I would like to see the proposed Hand Signals emoji
(e-B93-eBA1), not unified with already encoded characters, encoded
together in a block with sufficient space left to accommodate the
basic hand signs used in sign language, manual alphabets, and Indian
dance, ritual and iconography as well. Since there is a great deal of
overlap between all these sets of hand signs I think sufficient space
should be allocated so that they can be encoded together.