On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:13 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> So apparently, the
> CJK to Unicode mappings are still evolving and should be updated
> occasionally. Next steps would be to commit some or all of these
> differences after additional verification, and then update the scripts
> to use whatever the non-obsolete mapping sources are supposed to be.
Would that pose a problem for databases which have data in them
already using the old mappings?
--
greg
