❌ ❌
✅ #
Unicode Emoji
Contents
Submitting a Proposal
Example Submissions
Sequences & Other Proposals
Making Existing Characters be
Emoji
New Emoji Sequences
Submission Form Mods
Selection Factors
Selection Factors for Inclusion
Selection Factors for Exclusion
Evidence of Frequency
Images
Duplicate Images
Image Licenses
Process and Timeline
Initial Proposal
UTC Consideration
Processing Final Candidates
Sample Timeline
Process for Proposed Emoji
Sequences
Related Unicode Links
Unicode Emoji
UTR #51, Unicode Emoji
Unicode Emoji Data Files
Unicode Emoji Charts
FAQ: Emoji and Pictographs
FAQ: Emoji Submission
Emoji-related Press
Unicode Utilities Emoji Set (for
developers)
Other Emoji Resources
✅
Home | Site Map | Search
Submitting Emoji Proposals
Anyone can submit a proposal for an emoji character, but the
proposal needs to have all the right information for it to have a
chance of being accepted.
This page describes the process of submitting a proposal,
including how to submit a proposal, the selection factors that need
to be addressed in each proposal, guidelines on presenting
evidence of frequency, and the process and timeline for
acceptance.
Not all new emoji require new characters. Thus this page also
describes the process of proposing that:
existing characters be changed to be emoji, or
additional emoji sequences be added as valid or RGI.
Please read this entire page before preparing a proposal. In
particular:
Scan the list of Emoji Requests to see whether your proposed
emoji have already been submitted. If the status is Declined, it
may not be worth the effort to make a proposal.
Make sure you understand this whole document, especially
the Selection Factors.
Read the Limitations on Emoji Encoding section of Emoji
Encoding Principles.
Read the Emoji Submission FAQ for common questions and
answers.
Review some Example Submissions to see how previous
proposals were constructed.
Proposals are likely to be declined unless they are complete
and adhere to the submission instructions. Other proposals
may be returned to the submitter for adjustment based on
subcommittee review.
Submitting a Proposal
To submit a proposal for a new emoji, please prepare a document
according to the Form for Emoji Proposals. Your document must
contain all of the sections shown in the form, and should address,
as completely as possible, all of the items specified there.
Each proposal document must follow the Form for Emoji
Proposals. When submitting proposals via e-mail, you must
include the title in the Subject line.
Once you have completed your document, please follow the
directions in How to Submit Proposal Documents to submit it. For
timelines, see Process and Timeline.
Form for Emoji Proposals
Title: Proposal for Emoji <name(s)>
The <name(s)> must clearly identify each emoji being
proposed, such as Proposal for Emoji: PRAM or
Proposal for Emoji: PRAM; STROLLER
Submitter: <name>
The <name(s)> must clearly identify the submitter(s). Use ;
between multiple authors.
Date: <date>
When re-submitting revised documents, the document
date must still be updated each time.
1. Identification. Suggested short name and keywords for
the emoji, as in the Emoji List.
A. CLDR short name
B. CLDR keywords
Proposed emoji names should be general. Adjectives
or other narrowing terminology should be avoided
except where necessary to distinguish from an
existing character. For example, instead of SWAN
FACE, the name should be SWAN. Some existing
emoji names deviate from this for historical reasons.
2. Images. One sample color image and one sample
black&white image for each proposed emoji must be
included in the proposal and in an attached zip file. These
are to illustrate how each character might be displayed.
The format and license must be as specified in Images.
A. Zip File. Please send Zip files as e-mail attachments.
Do not provide links to file-sharing site URLs, or
include links in the proposals.
B. License. The proposer must certify that the images
have appropriate licenses for use by the Unicode
Consortium, and list the type of license.
C. Document. The images must be included in the
document at the top in two sizes: 18x18 and 72x72
pixels. The 18x18 image is to provide immediate
feedback (to you and the committee) as to whether the
image is distinctive enough.
3. Sort location. A proposed sort location for the emoji in
Emoji Ordering
A. Category (such as cat-face)
B. The emoji in that category that it should come after
(such as after WEARY CAT FACE).
4. (leave blank)
The above items must all be at the top of the first
page.
5. Selection factors — Inclusion. A section that addresses
all Selection Factors for Inclusion, and for each one
provides evidence as to what degree each of the proposed
characters would satisfy that factor.
A. Compatibility
B. Expected usage level
1. Frequency (must have separate evidence for each
proposed emoji)
B.1.a Google Search
B.1.b Bing Search
B.1.c Google Video Search
B.1.d Google Trends: Web Search
B.1.e Google Trends: Image Search
2. Multiple usages
3. Use in sequences
4. Breaking new ground
C. Distinctiveness
D. Completeness
6. Selection factors — Exclusion. A section that addresses
all Selection Factors for Inclusion, and for each one
provides evidence as to what degree each of the proposed
characters would satisfy that factor.
E. Petitions or “frequent requests”
F. Overly specific
G. Open-ended
H. Already representable
I. Logos, brands, UI icons, signage, specific people,
specific landmarks, deities
J. Transient
K. Faulty comparison
L. Exact Images
M. Region Flags Without Code
7. Other information. Any other information that would be
helpful, such as design considerations for images.
Normally, each proposal is for a single emoji. A group of related
emoji can be put into a single proposal. However, each of the
proposed emoji must have full justification, with all information as if
it were a separate proposal. So it is better to have separate
proposals for each unless they are extremely closely related.
Please:
don’t justify the addition of emoji because they further a
“cause”, no matter how worthwhile
don’t include specific code points (U+XXXXX) for proposed
characters
don’t include a filled-out Proposal Summary Form.
A proposal may be advanced despite a “cause” argument — if
other factors are compelling — but will not be advanced because
of it.
The committee will assign code points and fill out the Proposal
Summary Form later in the process. The original proposal may
then be amended to include those, as was done with the Food
emoji characters example below.
The names and images for approved characters may be changed
— sometimes substantially — from what is suggested in the
proposal. Quite often the name is generalized, for example. A
proposal for a brick wall or an iceberg might end up being just for
“brick” or “ice” (represented by an ice cube image). The image that
a vendor uses typically departs substantially from what is in the
proposal, such as to better fit with the “house style” for that
vendor.
Example Submissions
The Emoji Proposals chart contains a set of all proposals for emoji
up to the last release. More recent (but not yet accepted)
proposals can be found on Provisional Candidates and/or Draft
Candidates. As you read these, remember the following key facts:
New proposals must follow the current Form for Emoji
Proposals. This form may have changed since earlier
proposals were submitted. The earliest proposals on The
Emoji Proposals chart date from before the Form for Emoji
Proposals was in place.
A proposal may be accepted for reasons in addition to those
stated in the proposal.
A proposal may be accepted in spite of material in the text.
Proposals sometimes contain material that is irrelevant, or
even counterproductive. That material might be ignored by
the committee if the proposal is otherwise strong enough.
A final name and image accepted on the basis of the proposal
might differ from what is proposed.
Sequences & Other Proposals
Not all new emoji require new characters. People can propose
that:
existing characters be changed to be emoji
additional emoji sequences be added as valid or RGI
The timeline for these proposals is not as long as for new
characters, since existing characters can be changed to be emoji
or emoji sequences added on a shorter timeline, see Process and
Timeline.
You will need to supply color images, but for these proposals you
don't need the black and white images.
Making Existing Characters be Emoji
Some characters are already encoded in Unicode; they just aren’t
considered emoji (that is, they don’t have emoji properties). These
include the chess characters, for example. See
Extended_Pictographic for examples of similar characters.
Note that the color images may deviate quite substantially from
the Unicode black & white representative images, such as in the
Miscellaneous Symbols block. The following table illustrates the
how far the emoji image can vary from the black and white, which
can be quite minimal and symbolic.
B&W Emoji Code Character Name
U+26F0 MOUNTAIN
U+2699 GEAR
U+26F9 PERSON WITH BALL
However, if the Unicode character is completely symbolic,
emojification is not appropriate.
B&W Code Character
☶ U+2636 TRIGRAM FOR MOUNTAIN
If a proposal is accepted for recognizing an existing character as
an emoji, the outcome would be a change in the Emoji property
value for that character in emoji-data.txt.
New Emoji Sequences
Similarly, new sequences can be proposed for addition. These
include:
Making a valid sequence be RGI, such as a new ZWJ
sequence for dumpster fire represented internally by trash can
+ ZWJ + fire. Accepting that proposal would result in changes
to the data files emoji-sequences.txt or emoji-zwj-
sequences.txt.
Making an invalid sequence be valid, such as allowing for a
skin-tone modifier to apply to a character that it couldn't
before. Accepting that proposal would result in a change to
the Unicode Emoji specification.
Submission Form Mods
The submission form is almost the same as the Form for Emoji
Proposals, but with the following changes.
The <TITLE> is changed to one of
Proposal for Changing Characters to Emoji
Proposal for New RGI Emoji Sequences
Proposal for New Valid Emoji Sequences
The code points of the characters or sequences to be affected
must be listed in a new item 1.C Code Points.
Selection factors I, J, and L are not applicable, and should be
marked with N/A.
Images
Images must be supplied in a 'flat' zip file (without internal
folders), and must be sent in e-mail attachments, not as links to
file-sharing sites.
Images must be in PNG format with dimensions of 72x72 pixels.
The image should extend to the sides of the cell (ie, no extra
padding). Outside of the main image it should be transparent.
Black & white images must be suitable for fonts. Grayscale is not
acceptable. Examples:
black &
color grayscale
white
The file names must have the following format:
Non- <name>.png
Unicode
members name = the name of the proposal.
<vendor>_<hex>.png
vendor = a lowercase word based on a company or
product name, such as adobe, android, apple,
emojination, emojione, emojipedia, emojixpress, fb,
Unicode
fbm, samsung, twitter, and windows.
members <hex> = lowercase hex value(s) of the form [0-9a-f]{4-
6}, separated by _, with all “fe0f” values removed.
Provisional candidates Hex values in the range 100000-10fffd
Draft candidates Draft code points as assigned by the UTC
Released characters Assigned code points
Examples:
New proposal
a195.png name not descriptive
Yawning_face.png uppercase
yawning_face.png
Advanced to provisional candidate
proposed_101234.png
Advanced to draft candidate
proposed_1f004.png
Released, supplied by vendors
1f004.png missing vendor name
emoji_1f004.png bad vendor name
android_1F004.png uppercase
android_1f004.png
apple_002a20e3.png missing underbar
apple_002a_20e3.png
apple_1f915.png
facebook_2639_fe0f.png fe0f
facebook_2639.png
windows_1f3f3_fe0f_200d_1f308.png fe0f
windows_1f575_200d_2642.png
= Valid, = Invalid
Duplicate Images
The images supplied for deployed (or in-development) emoji
should represent how the system works in practice. For example,
if a system uses the same glyph for multiple emoji, then the image
should be supplied once for each emoji. This currently occurs on
some systems with:
gender variants with MALE / FEMALE signs, and the base. So
if the same image is used for person running and for man
running, then both x_1f3c3.png and x_1f3c3_200d_2642.png
should be supplied, each having the same image.
flags, such as for U.S. Outlying Islands and the US
modifier sequences where the base shows no visible skin
Image Licenses
The images must have appropriate licenses so they can be used
on the Unicode site, such as “public domain”, “licensed for non-
commercial use”, “free to share and use”, or equivalent (CC: CC0,
or BY*). If you have the rights to the image, state that it meets
those conditions, otherwise include a link to a page indicating that
the license for the image does meet those conditions.
Image Search (or equivalent) can be useful for finding suitable
images for proposed characters.
On Bing, choose Type > Clipart & License > Public
Domain, such as emu.
On Google, choose Search Tools > Type > Clipart &
License > Labeled for noncommercial reuse, such as
emu.
You can try filtering for usage rights or license. Sometimes
that’s too narrow, and you can find more images with a
general search, then clicking through to determine
whether the license is suitable.
Selection Factors
There are two kinds of selection factors. Some weigh in favor of
encoding the emoji, and some against. These are listed in the
sections below.
Selection Factors for Inclusion
Initially, the Unicode emoji characters were selected primarily on
the basis of compatibility. The selection factors have been
broadened to include other factors; here are the factors that the
Emoji subcommittee now considers when assessing possible new
emoji. None of these factors alone determine eligibility or priority:
all of the factors together are taken into consideration. The most
important factors for inclusion are compatibility and expected
usage level.
A. Compatibility. Are these needed for compatibility with high-use
emoji in popular existing systems, such as Snapchat, Twitter,
or QQ?
For example, FACE WITH ROLLING EYES.
For this to be a positive factor, the proposed emoji must
also have evidence of high-frequency use in that existing
system.
Mark this as n/a unless there are compelling examples.
B. Expected usage level. (See questions below) Measures that
can be presented as evidence include the following:
1. Frequency. Is there a high expected frequency of use?
This is the most important factor for inclusion.
There should be high expected usage worldwide, or
high expected usage within a very large user
community. For example, a community can be
geographic, such as users in Latin America or users
in Southeast Asia.
The evidence of frequency must follow the format
of Evidence of Frequency. In particular, the following
must be present:
B.1.a Google Search
B.1.b Bing Search
B.1.c Google Video Search
B.1.d Google Trends: Web Search
B.1.e Google Trends: Image Search
Be sure to read the entire section Evidence of
Frequency before starting.
2. Multiple usages. Does the candidate emoji have notable
metaphorical references or symbolism?
For example, SHARK is not necessarily only the
animal, but also used for a huckster, in jumping the
shark, loan shark, etc. The CAT FACE, PIG
FACE, or RABBIT FACE may be used to evoke
positive feelings, while SPIDER may used to evoke
negative feelings.
References for use as an archetype, metaphorical
use, and symbolism may be supplied.
Mark this as n/a unless there are compelling
examples.
3. Use in sequences. Can the candidate be used in
sequences?
For example, objects associated with professions or
activities are of interest for use in sequences: either
combined with a person using a ZWJ, or just in linear
sequence.
Mark this as n/a unless there are compelling
examples.
4. Breaking new ground. Does the character represent
something that is new and different?
More weight is given to emoji that convey concepts
that are not simply variants of concepts conveyed by
existing emoji or sequences of existing emoji.
For example, it would be better to proposal an emoji
for a new kind of animal rather than an emoji for a
new breed of dog.
Mark this as Yes or No. If yes, explain why.
C. Distinctiveness. Explain how and why your image represents a
distinct, visually depictable entity.
A visually depictable entity can be clearly represented by
an emoji-style rendering that is sufficiently recognizable.
Emoji images are paradigms, semantically representing a
class of entities much larger than a specific image. Thus a
U+1F37A beer mug represents not just a mug with
exactly the shape you see on the screen, filled with beer
of exactly that color, but rather beer in general.
The term recognizable means most people familar with
that entity should be able to discern that the
representation is intended to depict a paradigm of that
particular entity, without foreknowledge.
The image you supply will not be used in products,
but instead needs to demonstrate that the emoji is
distinct enough to be recognizable at typical emoji
sizes, such as 18×18 pixels on mobile phone screens.
The term entity includes not only concrete objects, but
also actions or emotions.
Actions or activities may be represented by capturing
a person or object in the midst of that action. Thus
U+1F3C3 person running also represents the
action of running, and U+1F622 crying face also
represents crying.
Emotions or mental states can be represented by a
face or body exhibiting that emotion or state. Thus
U+1F620 angry face also represents being angry,
or anger.
A representation may use commonly understood
“comic-style” visual elements, such as U+1F4AD
thought bubble, motion lines as in U+1F44B
waving hand and U+1F5E3 speaking head, or
other signifiers such as in U+1F634 sleeping face.
Some current emoji were added for compatibility, and
would not now qualify for emoji proposals because they
include text or abstract symbols. These include
U+1F195 NEW button or U+2653 Pisces. See also
Faulty comparison.
It is a strong negative factor if a proposed emoji is not
distinct enough from existing emoji (or sequences of
emoji), either semantically or in appearance, or contains
text or abstract symbols.
D. Completeness. Does the proposed pictograph fill a gap in
existing types of emoji?
In Unicode 8.0, for example, five emoji were added to
complete the zodiac, including SCORPION.
This factor has a small weight, compared to other
countervailing factors, especially low expected frequency.
Mark this as n/a unless there are compelling examples.
The goal is iconic representation of large categories, not
completeness in the sense of filling out the categories of a
scientific or taxonomic classification system.
Proposals should not attempt to make distinctions that
are too narrow. For example, there are emoji for
hearts typically drawn as purple, blue, green, yellow,
red, …; there is no need for finer gradations of color,
like sienna.
Selection Factors for Exclusion
E. Petitions or “frequent requests”.
Do not simply include listings of examples from social
media of people calling for the emoji. That is not reliable
enough data to be useful, and just detracts from the
strength of your proposal.
Similarly, petitions are counterproductive, and play no role
in selecting emoji. They are not considered as evidence,
since they are too easily skewed:
Petitions may have duplicates or robovotes.
The results could be skewed by commercial or
special-interest promotion of the petition.
For example, the commercial petitions for TACO
played no part in its selection; the TACO was
approved based on evidence in its proposal, not the
petitions.
F. Overly specific. Is the proposed character overly specific?
For example, SUSHI represents sushi in general,
although images frequently show a specific type, such as
Maguro. Adding SABA, HAMACHI, SAKE, AMAEBI and
others would be overly specific.
A limited number of emoji can be added each year. Thus
emoji that “break new ground” are strongly favored over
emoji that are variants of others. Thus a proposal for
additional species of owl would be viewed negatively.
G. Open-ended. Is it just one of many, with no special reason to
favor it over others of that type?
H. Already representable. Can the concept be represented by
another emoji or sequence, even if the image is not exactly