Description: After a bug fix for bug 66791, some interpuncts still looks so differently, and this was already reported in bug 124657. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open Test case.odt Actual Results: 1st line: First ‧ (U+2027) is rendered with Source Han Serif SC, second ‧ is rendered with fallback font. 2nd line: · (U+00B7) are all rendered with Liberarion Serif. Expected Results: N/A Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: Version: 25.2.0.1.0+ (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 00f426c5437893d158e6ce00bc540c326f6487d2 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10 X86_64 (10.0 build 19045); UI render: default; VCL: win Locale: zh-CN (zh_CN); UI: zh-CN Calc: threaded
Created attachment 198347 [details] Test case This is the file made for this bug report.
Created attachment 198348 [details] Screenshot This is what I have seen anyway.
In some fonts as Linux Libertine, Roboto and so on I've seen the glyphs for U+2014, U+2026 were sightly narrower then em width when they are compared with CJK fonts. So, the same bug fix should also applied to them as well. Also see: https://www.w3.org/International/clreq/#tables_of_chinese_punctuation_marks https://www.w3.org/International/jlreq/#cl-01 https://www.w3.org/International/klreq/#chars-grouping
In some fonts as Linux Libertine, Roboto and so on I've seen the glyphs for U+2013, U+2014, U+2026, U+25CF were sightly narrower then em width when they are compared with CJK fonts. So, the same bug fix should also applied to them as well. Also see: https://www.w3.org/International/clreq/#tables_of_chinese_punctuation_marks https://www.w3.org/International/jlreq/#cl-01
Created attachment 198432 [details] Test case 2
Created attachment 198433 [details] Another screenshot This time I reproduced with KaiTi font. Also see: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/windows-missing-fonts