Hi, LibreOffice Writer in Debian version 1:4.4.3-1 does not display Traditional Chinese variant 骨 (U+9AA8) when using "Noto Sans CJK TC Regular" and the language text is set to "Chinese (traditional)". It is, however, display Traditional Chinese variant of 骨 (U+9AA8) when using "Noto Sans CJK TC Regular" and the language text is set to "(none)". The correct glyph of 骨 (U+9AA8) in Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese is described in [0]. When using font "Noto Sans CJK TC Regular" from NotoSansCJK.ttc downloaded from [1], and the language text at the bottom center is set to "None (do not check spelling)", the Traditional Chinese variant of 骨 (U+9AA8) is displayed correctly. The problem happens when I change the language text to "Chinese (traditional)". In this configuration, the Simplified Chinese variant of 骨 (U+9AA8) is displayed. [0] https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-han-sans/raw/release/SourceHanSansReadMe.pdf [1] https://code.google.com/p/noto/source/browse/#git%2Fthird_party%2Fnoto_cjk
Please attach an odt file (writer file) that has the characters in it. Marking as NEEDINFO, once you attach please set to UNCONFIRMED. Thanks!
Created attachment 115601 [details] document_with_U+9AA8
Created attachment 116144 [details] comparison of language and font I tried doing this on Windows with just the traditional glyphs (NotoSansCJKtc-Regular.otf) and the simplified glyphs (NotoSansCJKsc-Regular.otf). The readme says that some of the formats (ttc) are only for linux and Mac. Using the TC font the glyph looks the same when the language is traditional, simplified, or none. Using the SC font the glyph looks the same when the language is traditional, simplified, or none. The TC and SC glyphs looked different. I have attached an archive of the document, a pdf export of that document, and a screenshot of the document. The pdf does not show the SC font. I wouldn't think that changing the language would alter the font. With your initial report does the same thing happen when you use a text editor or gedit? If it does then maybe there is a bug with the font. Other than that, hopefully somebody with linux will come along and have a look at this. Windows Vista 64 Version: 4.4.3.2 Build ID: 88805f81e9fe61362df02b9941de8e38a9b5fd16 Set to NEEDINFO. Change back to UNCONFIRMED when you have provided the necessary information.
I got the same issue with ubuntu 14.04 LTS, with the package "fonts-noto-cjk" installed. Note that if the font file format is supported only under Linux, then the issue should be verified this under Linux.
Mark Hung committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=4424daa225e73d291a3fd64d369cdda5857f3d51 tdf#91288 Does not display traditional Chinese variant of It will be available in 5.1.0. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Mark Hung committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "libreoffice-5-1": http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=ff592b85f02a1e16aa1668c874e733331e4e242b&h=libreoffice-5-1 tdf#91288 Does not display traditional Chinese variant of It will be available in 5.1.0.1. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Mark Hung committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "libreoffice-5-0": http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=48cf2d9fe9eea5e6fae310058b6f705553996635&h=libreoffice-5-0 tdf#91288 Does not display traditional Chinese variant of It will be available in 5.0.4. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
(Master is actually 5.2 now.)
Hi, The issue is fixed in Debian libreoffice-writer version 1:5.0.4~rc2-2, thanks for the great work.