Hi Takiguchi-san,
On 10/28/19 9:51 AM, Ichiroh Takiguchi wrote:
Hello.
I have no idea about compatibility impact.
But according to ftp://ftp.unicode.org/Public/12.1.0/ucd/UnicodeData.txt
These are BOX DRAWINGS characters.
2550;BOX DRAWINGS DOUBLE HORIZONTAL;So;0;ON;;;;;N;FORMS DOUBLE
HORIZONTAL;;;;
255E;BOX DRAWINGS VERTICAL SINGLE AND RIGHT DOUBLE;So;0;ON;;;;;N;FORMS
VERTICAL SINGLE AND RIGHT DOUBLE;;;;
2561;BOX DRAWINGS VERTICAL SINGLE AND LEFT DOUBLE;So;0;ON;;;;;N;FORMS
VERTICAL SINGLE AND LEFT DOUBLE;;;;
256A;BOX DRAWINGS VERTICAL SINGLE AND HORIZONTAL
DOUBLE;So;0;ON;;;;;N;FORMS VERTICAL SINGLE AND HORIZONTAL DOUBLE;;;;
I don't think it was used as valuable data until now.
I think it's necessary to evaluate compatibility.
What do you mean by "until now"? Are there customers claiming that it
should be corrected? Since the current JDK's mapping is not incorrect
per se (not just "best match"), I would like to know why this needs to
be fixed now.
Naoto
To Sato-san,
if you have any question and suggestion, please let me know.
To other reviewers,
please let me know if you have any question and concern.
Thanks,
Ichiroh Takiguchi
On 2019-10-19 16:36, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 14/10/2019 16:53, Ichiroh Takiguchi wrote:
Hello.
Could you review the fix ?
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232161
Change: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~itakiguchi/8232161/webrev.00/
I have a concern about 1-way trip conversion entries (4 entries) on
MS950 charset.
The detail information is in JDK-8232161 [1]
Do you know any sense on the compatibility impact of changing this? I
think Naoto has the same question and we aren't sure if this one with
need a compatibility property. I think it will need a CSR.
-Alan
