Turning OFF 'person' does not hide 'person' emoji variants

[ghost]

Describe the bug
Disabling person does not hide person emoji variants

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Go to 'Options > Gender'
2. Click on man and/or woman to turns ON
3. Click on person to turns OFF
4. See error

Expected behavior
Hide person variants if is person is turned OFF, while man and/or woman is turned ON.

Versions
Specify versions:
OS: Linux (Debian 11)
Qt: 5.15.2
EFCK: 1.0

Additional context, screenshots

[kernc]

I see we just do a rudimentary scan for "person":

efck/efck/emoji.py

Lines 26 to 30 in 096a7b6

	# Invert emoji filters from options
	should_skip_emoji = {k for filters in config_state[EmojiTab.__name__].values()
	for k, is_enabled in filters.items()
	if not is_enabled}
	should_skip_emoji = re.compile(fr'(?:^|(?:[:,] ))\b(?:{"|".join(should_skip_emoji)})').search

but a "person emoji" is apparently any "X" for which also "man X" and "woman X" exist:

efck/efck/emoji-ordering.txt

Lines 845 to 857 in 096a7b6

	U+1F9D1 U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 12.1 # 🧑‍⚕️ health worker
	U+1F9D1 U+1F3FB U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 12.1 # 🧑🏻‍⚕️ health worker: light skin tone
	U+1F9D1 U+1F3FC U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 12.1 # 🧑🏼‍⚕️ health worker: medium-light skin tone
	U+1F9D1 U+1F3FD U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 12.1 # 🧑🏽‍⚕️ health worker: medium skin tone
	U+1F9D1 U+1F3FE U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 12.1 # 🧑🏾‍⚕️ health worker: medium-dark skin tone
	U+1F9D1 U+1F3FF U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 12.1 # 🧑🏿‍⚕️ health worker: dark skin tone
	U+1F468 U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👨‍⚕️ man health worker
	U+1F468 U+1F3FB U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👨🏻‍⚕️ man health worker: light skin tone
	U+1F468 U+1F3FC U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👨🏼‍⚕️ man health worker: medium-light skin tone
	U+1F468 U+1F3FD U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👨🏽‍⚕️ man health worker: medium skin tone
	U+1F468 U+1F3FE U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👨🏾‍⚕️ man health worker: medium-dark skin tone
	U+1F468 U+1F3FF U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👨🏿‍⚕️ man health worker: dark skin tone
	U+1F469 U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👩‍⚕️ woman health worker

🤔

[ghost]

Is it Unicode version: 12.1 and 4.0?

U+1F9D1 U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 12.1 # 🧑‍⚕️ health worker
...
U+1F468 U+200D U+2695 U+FE0F ; 4.0 # 👨‍⚕️ man health worker 

If so, maybe it needs to add setting for "Unicode version" in "Options".

N.B. In Android app "UnicodePad" there is Unicode version setting for compatibility issues:

• https://github.com/Ryosuke839/UnicodePad

[kernc]

Is it Unicode version: 12.1 and 4.0?

Those are just Unicode versions that introduced the symbol. Unreliable and not future-compatible.

I'd rather not (have the user) filter by Unicode version. We simply enumerate all the glyphs from the latest (vendored) Unicode standard, and the user might see some of the emoji icons blank, depending on the platform/font availability.