On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 10:51, Murray Cumming wrote: > Standard questions: > > 1. Is this a regression, compare to GNOME 2.6? No. (It was a GNOME-2.4 => GNOME-2.6 regression.) > 2. How much has this been tested, to watch out for general horrible > brokenness elsewhere? Not a lot, though I'm unable to imagine general horrible brokenness from this. The change basically just means that U+3000 goes down the same code path as the 60,000 ideographic characters. non-CJK users won't be affected at all, because they won't have U+3000 in their texts. I'd be pretty darn surprised if CJK users were affected adversely. Regards, Owen (I suppose a determined programmer could write code that would be broken by the change ... e.g., if they somehow were assuming that the sequence U+0020 U+3000 would always be shaped into a single run with a single font. But they'd have to be *really* trying.)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part