[matsemann]

> There have been some ridiculous inclusions in the past years despite more obvious candidates that are still missing.

Well, obvious missing to you. That's probably why it will always expand, no one will agree on when it's done, including you. ;)

[johnofthesea]

I use Emojis for my gardening site as icons for taxonomical families. So I would welcome some berries and maybe more vegetables.

[RobotToaster]

Have you looked at fork awesome? It's an icon toolkit that basically gives you a lot more emojis https://forkaweso.me/Fork-Awesome/

[johnofthesea]

I have used Font Awesome back in the days. Have not used this one yet. Bookmarked just in case. Thanks.

[WastingMyTime89]

Have you heard of this thing called an image?

[dagmx]

Emoji are zero cost resources for websites on most devices and have the benefit of matching the users expectations of iconography across the system, not to mention being accessible by default.

It’s really a win win of size reduction, consistency and accessibility.

The only competitive systems are something like font-awesome icons or SFSymbols. The latter isn’t available to sites afaik though.

[lapcat]

> consistency

There's no consistency, because different operating systems and web browsers display emoji differently, and emoji availability depends crucially on the OS or browser version.

[joshmanders]

The consistency is that if you use a (mushroom) emoji as an icon for your stuff, users on Windows will immediately know what it is because they are aware of how the emojis on their OS work. Same with Android, iOS, etc. Not that all emojis are the same across all devices.

[lapcat]

This is less consistent than images, which are generally rendered the same on all devices. Worse, though, is the broken black boxes that appear when someone uses a newer emoji that your browser or operating system version doesn't yet support, which happens all of the time.

[dagmx]

The emoji is consistent across their system. That’s the consistency that matters to most users.

[lapcat]

Incorrect, because emoji are being used to communicate with other people on different systems. That's their primary purpose, not to write to yourself.

[__jonas]

Emojis are great as quick icons that take zero work to source, add in, align with text in the layout and size consistently.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that, especially since people on hn love to complain about inclusion of unnecessary assets in websites that could be more lightweight.

[xdennis]

Every platform has its own set of pictures for emojis. How can you possibly align and size them consistently?

[__jonas]

I don't know what you are saying, they are always sized and aligned based on the font size regardless of platform or their appearance.

[capableweb]

Looked it up, "image" sounds just like Emoji but with extra steps, annoying.

[johnofthesea]

Hh sure I even like to create some. But for this purpose I do not bother. I need something small that I can just use for personal purpose. It works well with outdoor internet - where it is used. Adds bit of accent on minimal site to ease the navigation.

I do not really care if they add more veggies etc. I mentioned it as user-case in context of adding random Emojis.

[Symbiote]

I'll suggest genitals and breasts as the most obvious missing emojis. Most other major body parts are included.

[arcanemachiner]

Well, there's the eggplant and the peach.