Smileys for the 2015 forum

[namida]

I'm sure it could be done if we do decide on making any such changes.

[Clam]

to the new set of Lix smileys!

I'd be quite happy to adopt (/keep) all of the smileys mentioned in this topic so far (though admittedly the clam-eyed lemming is borderline ). The poster can decide which ones to use, and which ones everyone else will see in their posts.

-- 8()

[ccexplore]

Edit: out of curiosity, would it be possible to save the smileys used by existing posts as-is and constrain all the changes we decide on strictly affect posts hereafter?

AFAIK, it's not possible for the same sequence of characters to translate to different smilies based on when the post was created.  New smilies will need to get their own sequences of characters, and existing sequences of characters in used by existing smilies should probably be left alone.

Maybe it's like the difference of :-) and Guyperfect's persistent (-:.

Great idea actually, this is a lot more elegant than having to do something like :lix).

With that in mind, here are some proposed codes for the new Lix smilies.  Comments welcome.

|	Lix	|	(filename)	|	Lem analog	|	current code for Lem analog	|	proposed code for Lix	|
|		|	lix-2-ashamed.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-ashamed:	|
|		|	lix-2-blush.png	|		|	:-[	|	]-:	|
|		|	lix-2-cool.png	|		|	8-)	|	(-8	|
|		|	lix-2-cry.png	|		|	:'(	|	),:	|
|		|	lix-2-dead.png	|		|	:XD:	|	:ⱭX: or :DX: or :(|X:	|
|		|	lix-2-evil.png	|		|	:evil:	|	:lix-evil:	|
|		|	lix-2-frown.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-frown:	|
|		|	lix-2-gasp.png	|		|	:o	|	o-:	|
|		|	lix-2-glare.png	|		|	>:(	|	):<	|
|		|	lix-2-grin.png	|		|	:D	|	Ɑ: or (|:	|
|		|	lix-2-laugh.png	|		|	:laugh:	|	:lix-laugh:	|
|		|	lix-2-mysterious.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-mysterious:	|
|		|	lix-2.png	|	n/a	|		|	:lix2:	|
|		|	lix-2-sad.png	|		|	:(	|	)-:	|
|		|	lix-2-scared.png	|		|	:scared:	|	:lix-scared:	|
|		|	lix-2-scream.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-scream:	|
|		|	lix-2-sick.png	|		|	:sick:	|	:lix-sick:	|
|		|	lix-2-smile.png	|		|	:)	|	(:	|
|		|	lix-2-suspicious.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-suspicious:	|
|		|	lix-2-tongue.png	|		|	:P	|	d-:	|
|		|	lix-2-troubled.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-troubled:	|
|		|	lix-2-unsure.png	|		|	:-\	|	\-:	|
|		|	lix-2-wink.png	|		|	;)	|	(;	|
|		|	lix-2-winktongue.png	|		|	;P	|	d-;	|
|		|	lix-2-yawn.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-yawn:	|
|		|	lix-2-yell.png	|	?	|	?	|	:lix-yell:	|

[namida]

Edit: out of curiosity, would it be possible to save the smileys used by existing posts as-is and constrain all the changes we decide on strictly affect posts hereafter?

AFAIK, it's not possible for the same sequence of characters to translate to different smilies based on when the post was created.  New smilies will need to get their own sequences of characters, and existing sequences of characters in used by existing smilies should probably be left alone.

Nothing is impossible.
Option A) Modify SMF's code to implement this difference.
Option B) Have a hidden, second code for all of the pre-existing smileys, and write a script to modify old posts to use this code.

[ccexplore]

[ ^ oops sorry, somehow I wound up modifying the post above instead of creating a new post in reply Hopefully changes reverted.]

Nothing is impossible.
Option A) Modify SMF's code to implement this difference.
Option B) Have a hidden, second code for all of the pre-existing smileys, and write a script to modify old posts to use this code.

That seems like a lot of work for an off-hand question from NaOH that I'm not even quite sure I understand the purpose thereof.  But hey, if you're up for it, more power to you!

Option B could be considered if we actually settled on some changes that would modify the graphics associated with an existing code, but other than :o (for which my proposal would leave it as-is anyway, at least graphic-wise), it seems like we're dealing with all new smileys?

[Proxima]

With that in mind, here are some proposed codes for the new Lix smilies.  Comments welcome.

Nice idea. The only thing is, it would be nice to have shorter codes rather than "lix-[adjective]". Looking at the shape of features, I suggest:

'-| for ashamed (looks more "shady" than "ashamed" to me anyway)
':| for frown
(-> for laugh
/-' for mysterious
|:: for scared
||X for scream
I:> for sick
'-7 for suspicious
|-X for troubled
[]| for yawn
[]X for yell

(What character is the backwards D?)

[Simon]

I'm still wary of introducing the entire second set of smileys at all.

I discourage replacing (-: or (: by things. These are bound to come up much more often in normal conversation than :keyword:, especially with a rigid and minimal set of keywords. By using (-: and :-) you assume there will be exactly 2 sets, and never more. Can even quote Guyperfect himself here: "Always always always always always design for n things."

If you want a second set of smileys, :group-mood: seems to me a better code, more memorable for whoever has typed :mood: per hand so far already. And it's guaranteed prefix-free. :keyword: is standard on other boards for nonstandard replacements.

The original issue for this thread is still there, smileys for different expressions are too similar. It's less severe for the lix set, because those have mouths.

-- Simon

[ccexplore]

I discourage replacing (-: or (: by things. <snip>By using (-: and :-) you assume there will be exactly 2 sets, and never more.

The proposal's more like a second set of special cases, in the same way that many of the existing Lemmings smileys are already special cases not conforming to :keyword: or :group-keyword:

That said, maybe the argument is that the benefits of using (-: over :lix-smile: are unclear/weak at best.  I expect (though admittedly without hard data) that most people will see the smileys in their graphic form, and insert them most of the time by clicking on their graphics.  Thus the encodings are irrelevant most of the time except in the case of accidental instances (a point Simon raised, which I've tried to address by being mindful of it, hence the proposal of o-: instead of o: for example).  For the minority cases where the smileys will be displayed without graphics (eg. proposed "lite" theme or the user profile setting to turn off smileys), or where the user chooses to type out the encoding manually, there are some pros and cons between (-: vs :lix-smile:, none of which particularly stands out to me (but mostly because I simply don't fall into the minority cases with my usage patterns).

Anyway, so one vote for (Proxima) and one vote against (Simon) so far. I'd like this proposal settled before I started adding the Lix smileys.

(What character is the backwards D?)

I just randomly perused in the Character Map application on Windows, and ran into U+2C6D "Latin Capital Letter Alpha" which looks very close to a backwards D.  For all I know the Unicode standard might actually have a true "backwards D" somewhere.  To be honest, I'm slightly wary of introducing non-ASCII characters into the encodings (for one thing, it defeats the purpose of being able to easily type out by hand).  I was inspired to do so mainly because of D:, but in hindsight I should probably go with (|: instead.

The original issue for this thread is still there, smileys for different expressions are too similar.

Hmm, so how do you see it play out in my compromise proposal where all three variants of :o are available?  Is it important that any existing posts using :o be changed to a new smiley graphic, or is it okay to leave that encoding unchanged as long as the proposed improved variants are available for use under other encodings?  Or is a compromise already not acceptable on the grounds of still being in existence?

[edit: or did I misread, and you mean that the proposed Lix set still has too many similar-looking expressions?]

[NaOH]

If you want a second set of smileys, :group-mood: seems to me a better code, more memorable for whoever has typed :mood: per hand so far already. And it's guaranteed prefix-free. :keyword: is standard on other boards for nonstandard replacements.

Seconded. The novelty of :ⱭX: will wear off very quickly. Honestly, I don't see the need make the smiley-codes cutesy at all. I'd rather be able to type :) and have it display as I've written it. If I want then I'll just click the button, or else memorize :smile: if I really need to type it out.

( Also, colon-parenthesis are useful as text on their own :)
( Also, colon-parenthesis are useful as text on their own

So definitely, :group-name: seems like an excellent hierarchy structure that is flexible for future modifications.

[Clam]

^ Seconding this suggestion.



So, just to make this explicit / check that I understand the suggestions:

• All smiley codes take the form :lemming-smile: (with some exceptions? )
• :) etc. aren't smiley codes any more and just appear as written
• Existing instances of :) get edited to :lemming-smile:, to maintain the intentions of the poster at the time

And if that's not what's being suggested, then I'm suggesting it right now

[ccexplore]

I'm under the impression Simon's against introducing new smiley codes that are non-conforming to :group-keyword:, but was not pushing for changing all existing codes into conformance, even if I'm sure he's fine with doing so.  If anything, I kinda feel bad for Simon as this whole thread's ballooned off to all these different directions with all these extra smileys that, neat as they are, have very little to do with his original request (which I promise I'll get to, operating under a "wait for roughly 24 hours has passed and no one clearly communicated objections to my compromise proposal, so let's go with that and it's not completely set in stone in worst case" directive).

Anything that involves automated bulk-updating of existing posts I will need to defer to namida due to experience (including more experiencing in restoring from backups, which is always a worst case possibility).  Please balance that consideration against how soon you want the new smileys be made available for use.

[namida]

If you go ahead with this and are waiting for me to update old posts, just temporarily have two copies of all pre-existing smilies, with the new shortcuts being the ones that are visible and the old ones being hidden ones.

[ccexplore]

So, just to make this explicit / check that I understand the suggestions:

• All smiley codes take the form :lemming-smile: (with some exceptions? )
• :) etc. aren't smiley codes any more and just appear as written
• Existing instances of :) get edited to :lemming-smile:, to maintain the intentions of the poster at the time

And if that's not what's being suggested, then I'm suggesting it right now

Hold on...aren't you the same person that was making fun of my :lemming: for on IRC?   And then proceeded to come up with super creative and highly nonconforming encodings for that?

Considering that this seems to have come out of nowhere, can we consider that just because it is theoretically possible doesn't mean it is necessary?  Are we asking for it just because I opened the floodgates to changing the smileys, or is there an actual proven problem to address?  I don't believe the common smileys like :) have been causing problems in practice in terms of accidental instances or the rare need to suppress their conversion to graphics, or else the issues would've been brought up already on this thread before all the new smileys came up.

Also, I wonder whether there might be some people who are simply more used to just typing out :) for the commonly used smileys because that's how they'd have to do it in other mediums like IRC.  With that in mind, we would be actually conforming to a more widely adopted standard to stick with the current encodings for the "common" smileys?  New smileys can stick with :group-mood: since most of them are likely specialized and won't have a "common" encoding (though even the Clam seems to be an exception already...)

Anyhow, just my 2 cents before we rashly head into the big change.

[ccexplore]

Please balance that consideration against how soon you want the new smileys be made available for use.

It occurred to me this is totally misleading since the new smileys are pretty much independent of the questionable request to update existing smileys' encodings.  This is what happens when multiple requests sort get all lumped together.

So as there have been no further objections, all the smileys that have been proposed on the thread have now been added (accessible on post form as the usual clickable images).  All the Lix smileys are encoded as :lix-<BLAH>:, and we have

:o => (tooltip: "Surprised")
:lem-shocked: => (tooltip: "Shocked!")
:lem-mindblown: => (tooltip: "Mind Blown!!!")

I realize the definition of "compromise" generally means "no one's actually happy".  That said, the alternative could mean some people simply stop using the smiley for the surprised/shocked emotion, a situation which can be considered a sort of "invisible smiley", which might be considered worse than the problem of too few differentiated pixels or lack of mouth?

[NaOH]

Also, I wonder whether there might be some people who are simply more used to just typing out :) for the commonly used smileys because that's how they'd have to do it in other mediums like IRC. 

Those people are also used to their smileys being seen as written. :)