Well, no, precisely, it doesn't, which is the problem. Say that you are departing from terminal 3, how does a boarding card telling you that you will be going from gate F14 help? The F doesn't correspond to anything, it is a random letter, completely unrelated to the new terminal logic. That's why I personally think that calling your gate 314 (or 3.14) would be a lot more intuitive as it would include the terminal and gate in a single gate number.

I think the problem is that ADP and AF alike choose to start from their unnecessary complications to try and shape the whole system. As a result, what is supposed to be a simplifying exercise is no such thing because the airport and airline are starting from the cretinous design of 2E (future 5) and mess up the logic of everything else for the sake of 2E. This is really what the French would call "marcher sur la tete". If the problem is 2E (T5) and 2E only, then use the silly letters or colours or whatever you want for that terminal only and leave the rest alone. And just use normal letters - like make the terminal 1 gates 101 to 1xx, terminal 2 gates 201 to 2xx, etc and then just for terminal 5 if you really want to keep the silly logic of it then use zones A, B, and C or blue, red and yellow, or dog, cat and mouse or whatever you want for that ridiculous terminal alone without adding unnecessary complexity to the rest of the operations.

Easier however would be to just call the K, L, and M gates terminals e.g. 7, 8 and 9 (with 2F becoming T5 and 2G becoming T6) and simply have a common check in area for terminals 7, 8 and 9. And of course, as pointed by several of you, what's the point of any of it if AF continues the 2E/2F check in vs departure\?