I will have to run it through my tests (which will take a bit of a change to the code), but I don't anticipate any problems.<br><br clear="all">Mark<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 11:59, Kenneth Whistler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kenw@sybase.com">kenw@sybase.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Patrik asked awhile ago:<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> I can say that the introduction of 5.2 give _zero_ changes needed to<br>
> the exclusion lists. I "just" run my software on the 5.2 versions of<br>
> the Unicode data.<br>
><br>
> Mark, others, can you please verify this?<br>
<br>
</div>I didn't see anyone else respond, so yes, I think we can verify<br>
that nothing that was added or changed in Unicode 5.2 should<br>
have had any impact whatsoever on the stability of the exclusion<br>
lists.<br>
<br>
--Ken<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Idna-update mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Idna-update@alvestrand.no">Idna-update@alvestrand.no</a><br>
<a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update" target="_blank">http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>