Thank you for the report. From Bug 1395508 we were supposed to decode consecutive whitespaces, it looks like that's not working here. \u200c is not part of the list, I suspect because it's supposed to be zero-width? But apparently it's not. We encode \u2000-\u200a We are also supposed to ensure the origin is visible, so we must check why in this case that is failing.
Bug 1925496 Comment 7 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
Thank you for the report. From Bug 1395508 we were supposed to decode consecutive whitespaces, it looks like that's not working here. \u200c is not part of the list of encoded characters, I suspect because it's supposed to be zero-width? But apparently it's not. We encode \u2000-\u200a We are also supposed to ensure the origin is visible, so we must check why in this case that is failing.
Thank you for the report. From Bug 1395508 we were supposed to decode consecutive whitespaces, it looks like that's not working here. \u200c is not part of the list of encoded characters (We encode \u2000-\u200a), I suspect because it's supposed to be zero-width? ~But apparently it's not~ Ah I see this is wisely fragmented with %20 exactly to bypass the encoding. We are also supposed to ensure the origin is visible, so we must check why in this case that is failing.
Thank you for the report. From Bug 1395508 we were supposed to decode consecutive whitespaces, it looks like that's not working here. \u200c is not part of the list of encoded characters (We encode \u2000-\u200a), I suspect because it's supposed to be zero-width? ~But apparently it's not~ Ah I see this is wisely fragmented with %20 exactly to bypass the encoding. Any zero-width would allow to bypass the encode-consecutive-spaces" regex with no visible signs. We are also supposed to ensure the origin is visible, so we must check why in this case that is failing.
Thank you for the report. From Bug 1395508 we were supposed to decode consecutive whitespaces, it looks like that's not working here. \u200c is not part of the list of encoded characters (We encode \u2000-\u200a), I suspect because it's supposed to be zero-width? ~But apparently it's not~ Ah I see this is wisely fragmented with %20 exactly to bypass the encoding. Any zero-width would allow to bypass the encode-consecutive-spaces regex with no visible signs. We are also supposed to ensure the origin is visible, so we must check why in this case that is failing.