The three main stations briefly:
| Time | Documented example | What changed? |
|---|---|---|
| 1982 | Fahlman's text smiley. | It separated humorous and serious messages with punctuation. |
| 1999 | DOCOMO's set of 176 elements. | Small pictorial symbols were introduced into mobile messages. |
| 2010 | Unicode 6.0. | Common character identification expanded with a larger emoji set. |
These are documented milestones. You can find the original sources associated with them in the sections below.
A documented text smiley from 1982
Scott Fahlman 1982. September 19, in a message preserved on the Carnegie Mellon University website, suggested the :-) character sequence to mark humorous messages. The :-( sequence also appeared there to distinguish serious messages. This is a well-documented station in the history of online emoticon use. Source: the original conversation on the CMU site
Such a symbol consisted of available punctuation marks. Those who knew its use could more easily notice the author's intention. However, common knowledge was needed for interpretation: the symbol itself did not explain the entire background of the conversation.
This still has a lesson today. A team or group of friends can develop their own short signals, but these may require explanation for a new participant. Learning common usage remains a separate task alongside technical display.
One of the known milestones of Japanese mobile emojis
NTT DOCOMO released a set of 176 emojis in 1999. Shigetaka Kurita's figures were created in a 12 × 12 pixel frame. The MoMA collection dates this work to 1998–1999 and also presents its significance related to mobile messaging. Source: MoMA, Shigetaka Kurita – Emoji
The set included weather and other pictorial symbols alongside facial expressions. The name "emoji" originates from the combination of Japanese words meaning picture and character. The "emo" at the beginning of the word can therefore easily mislead those who associate it with the English word emotion.
The 12 × 12 pixel size provided a narrow frame: recognizable symbols had to be drawn on 144 pixels. The set preserved by MoMA presents this specific designer work. However, not all the background of visual communication can be tied to a single set.
Common identification facilitated interoperability
Unicode 6.0 2010. October 11 was released. One significant expansion of the release was related to emojis, and a separate data file mapped the symbols to earlier Japanese carrier sets. Source: Unicode 6.0 release notes
The practical value of standardization is that different programs can use common character identifiers. The general purpose of Unicode is to ensure unified character handling across platforms and languages. Source: What is Unicode?
This explains one peculiarity of today's operation: copied text can carry the same characters forward, while a different drawing appears on the receiving side. Common identification and visible graphics remain separate layers.
What does your current phone explain from this?
The old :-) remains typable punctuation. You can transmit the 🙂 emoji as a character, and the receiving system provides the drawing. The inclusion of a new emoji in the standard may still require further updates on the phone or in the application.
Thus, common identification facilitates transmission, but conversation is needed for common interpretation. When reading old messages, also consider the customs and background of the time. Today's slang alone does not explain what someone meant years ago.
You can try this out on modern examples in articles about the difference in forms and the differing drawings of devices.
Take the essence with you
Three-question knowledge quiz
Try how you would apply what you read. Mark one answer per question; every correct answer is worth one point. The evaluation provides feedback for these three situations; we do not store or send your answers.
Write next to the 1982, 1999, and 2010 examples what technical change they show.
Write next to the 1982, 1999, and 2010 examples what technical change they show.
Read the appropriate station of the chronological table again.
In the three questions, you distinguished between form, identification, and interpretation; look at one of the original sources.
Solutions and explanations
- The former was built from punctuation, the latter from small image characters. The two historical stations used different technical formats.
- Different programs can handle the same characters. Identification helps interoperability, but the drawing and interpretation may still differ.
- Together with the contemporary context and the other sentences of the conversation. Without contemporary customs and background, the modern reading can be misleading.
Count your correct answers: each is worth one point. A skipped answer is worth zero points.
- 3 points: In the three questions, you distinguished between format, identification, and interpretation; look at one of the original sources.
- 2 points: Read the appropriate station of the chronological table again.
- 0–1 points: Write next to the 1982, 1999, and 2010 examples what technical change they show.
