ââåno Art to Find the Mindã¢ââ¢s Construction in the Faceã¢ââ Why Is This Line Ironic
Mojibake (Japanese: 文字化け; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the result of text being decoded using an unintended grapheme encoding.[1] The result is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, often from a dissimilar writing system.
This display may include the generic replacement character ("�") in places where the binary representation is considered invalid. A replacement tin can also involve multiple consecutive symbols, as viewed in one encoding, when the same binary code constitutes one symbol in the other encoding. This is either because of differing constant length encoding (every bit in Asian 16-scrap encodings vs European 8-bit encodings), or the employ of variable length encodings (notably UTF-eight and UTF-sixteen).
Failed rendering of glyphs due to either missing fonts or missing glyphs in a font is a dissimilar issue that is non to be confused with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the code point displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement graphic symbol. Importantly, these replacements are valid and are the result of correct error treatment past the software.
Etymology [edit]
Mojibake ways "character transformation" in Japanese. The word is composed of 文字 (moji, IPA: [mod͡ʑi]), "character" and 化け (broil, IPA: [bäke̞], pronounced "bah-keh"), "transform".
Causes [edit]
To correctly reproduce the original text that was encoded, the correspondence between the encoded data and the notion of its encoding must be preserved. Equally mojibake is the instance of non-compliance between these, it can be achieved by manipulating the information itself, or just relabeling it.
Mojibake is often seen with text data that have been tagged with a wrong encoding; it may not even exist tagged at all, but moved between computers with different default encodings. A major source of trouble are communication protocols that rely on settings on each computer rather than sending or storing metadata together with the data.
The differing default settings between computers are in part due to differing deployments of Unicode among operating system families, and partly the legacy encodings' specializations for different writing systems of man languages. Whereas Linux distributions generally switched to UTF-8 in 2004,[2] Microsoft Windows mostly uses UTF-sixteen, and sometimes uses 8-scrap code pages for text files in different languages.[ dubious ]
For some writing systems, an example being Japanese, several encodings have historically been employed, causing users to meet mojibake relatively oft. As a Japanese example, the word mojibake "文字化け" stored as EUC-JP might be incorrectly displayed as "ﾊｸｻ�ｽ､ｱ", "ﾊｸｻ嵂ｽ､ｱ" (MS-932), or "ﾊｸｻ郾ｽ､ｱ" (Shift JIS-2004). The aforementioned text stored as UTF-8 is displayed as "譁�蟄怜喧縺�" if interpreted as Shift JIS. This is further exacerbated if other locales are involved: the same UTF-8 text appears as "æ–‡å—化ã'" in software that assumes text to exist in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-i encodings, usually labelled Western, or (for example) as "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted as being in a GBK (Red china) locale.
| Original text | 文 | 字 | 化 | け | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw bytes of EUC-JP encoding | CA | B8 | BB | FA | B2 | BD | A4 | B1 |
| Bytes interpreted equally Shift-JIS encoding | ﾊ | ｸ | ｻ | 郾 | ｽ | ､ | ｱ | |
| Bytes interpreted as ISO-8859-1 encoding | Ê | ¸ | » | ú | ² | ½ | ¤ | ± |
| Bytes interpreted as GBK encoding | 矢 | 机 | 步 | け | ||||
Underspecification [edit]
If the encoding is not specified, information technology is up to the software to decide it by other means. Depending on the type of software, the typical solution is either configuration or charset detection heuristics. Both are prone to mis-prediction in non-so-uncommon scenarios.
The encoding of text files is affected by locale setting, which depends on the user's language, make of operating arrangement and possibly other conditions. Therefore, the assumed encoding is systematically wrong for files that come from a reckoner with a unlike setting, or even from a differently localized software within the aforementioned arrangement. For Unicode, one solution is to apply a byte order marker, only for source code and other machine readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Some other is storing the encoding as metadata in the file system. File systems that support extended file attributes can store this as user.charset.[3] This also requires support in software that wants to take advantage of it, but does not disturb other software.
While a few encodings are easy to detect, in particular UTF-8, there are many that are hard to distinguish (meet charset detection). A web browser may not be able to distinguish a folio coded in EUC-JP and some other in Shift-JIS if the coding scheme is not assigned explicitly using HTTP headers sent forth with the documents, or using the HTML document's meta tags that are used to substitute for missing HTTP headers if the server cannot be configured to ship the proper HTTP headers; see character encodings in HTML.
Mis-specification [edit]
Mojibake besides occurs when the encoding is wrongly specified. This often happens between encodings that are similar. For example, the Eudora email client for Windows was known to send emails labelled as ISO-8859-1 that were in reality Windows-1252.[iv] The Mac OS version of Eudora did not exhibit this behaviour. Windows-1252 contains actress printable characters in the C1 range (the about frequently seen being curved quotation marks and extra dashes), that were not displayed properly in software complying with the ISO standard; this especially affected software running under other operating systems such as Unix.
Human ignorance [edit]
Of the encodings even so in use, many are partially compatible with each other, with ASCII as the predominant common subset. This sets the stage for human ignorance:
- Compatibility can exist a deceptive property, as the mutual subset of characters is unaffected past a mixup of 2 encodings (see Problems in different writing systems).
- People think they are using ASCII, and tend to label whatever superset of ASCII they actually use as "ASCII". Maybe for simplification, but even in academic literature, the discussion "ASCII" tin can be found used as an example of something not compatible with Unicode, where evidently "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-8.[1] Notation that UTF-viii is backwards uniform with ASCII.
Overspecification [edit]
When there are layers of protocols, each trying to specify the encoding based on different information, the least certain information may exist misleading to the recipient. For instance, consider a web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The graphic symbol prepare may exist communicated to the client in whatever number of three means:
- in the HTTP header. This information can be based on server configuration (for instance, when serving a file off disk) or controlled past the application running on the server (for dynamic websites).
- in the file, equally an HTML meta tag (
http-equivorcharset) or theencodingattribute of an XML declaration. This is the encoding that the author meant to salvage the particular file in. - in the file, as a byte social club mark. This is the encoding that the writer'south editor actually saved it in. Unless an accidental encoding conversion has happened (by opening it in one encoding and saving it in some other), this will be correct. It is, all the same, only available in Unicode encodings such equally UTF-8 or UTF-sixteen.
Lack of hardware or software support [edit]
Much older hardware is typically designed to support just one grapheme set and the grapheme set typically cannot be altered. The character table contained within the brandish firmware volition be localized to take characters for the state the device is to exist sold in, and typically the table differs from country to state. As such, these systems will potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a system from a unlike country. Likewise, many early operating systems practice not support multiple encoding formats and thus will stop upward displaying mojibake if made to display non-standard text—early versions of Microsoft Windows and Palm Bone for example, are localized on a per-land footing and will but back up encoding standards relevant to the state the localized version volition be sold in, and will display mojibake if a file containing a text in a different encoding format from the version that the Bone is designed to back up is opened.
Resolutions [edit]
Applications using UTF-8 equally a default encoding may achieve a greater degree of interoperability considering of its widespread use and astern compatibility with The states-ASCII. UTF-viii also has the ability to be directly recognised by a unproblematic algorithm, and then that well written software should be able to avert mixing UTF-8 up with other encodings.
The difficulty of resolving an instance of mojibake varies depending on the awarding within which it occurs and the causes of it. Two of the almost common applications in which mojibake may occur are web browsers and word processors. Modern browsers and give-and-take processors often support a wide array of grapheme encodings. Browsers often allow a user to modify their rendering engine'due south encoding setting on the wing, while word processors allow the user to select the appropriate encoding when opening a file. It may take some trial and mistake for users to find the correct encoding.
The problem gets more complicated when it occurs in an application that usually does not support a wide range of character encoding, such as in a non-Unicode figurer game. In this case, the user must change the operating system's encoding settings to match that of the game. However, irresolute the organization-wide encoding settings can also cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or later on, a user also has the option to utilize Microsoft AppLocale, an application that allows the changing of per-application locale settings. Even and so, changing the operating organisation encoding settings is not possible on before operating systems such as Windows 98; to resolve this effect on earlier operating systems, a user would have to use third party font rendering applications.
Problems in different writing systems [edit]
English language [edit]
Mojibake in English texts generally occurs in punctuation, such as em dashes (—), en dashes (–), and curly quotes (",",','), only rarely in grapheme text, since most encodings hold with ASCII on the encoding of the English alphabet. For example, the pound sign "£" will appear equally "£" if information technology was encoded by the sender as UTF-viii but interpreted past the recipient as CP1252 or ISO 8859-1. If iterated using CP1252, this can lead to "£", "£", "ÃÆ'‚£", etc.
Some computers did, in older eras, accept vendor-specific encodings which acquired mismatch likewise for English text. Commodore brand 8-bit computers used PETSCII encoding, specially notable for inverting the upper and lower case compared to standard ASCII. PETSCII printers worked fine on other computers of the era, but flipped the case of all letters. IBM mainframes use the EBCDIC encoding which does not match ASCII at all.
Other Western European languages [edit]
The alphabets of the North Germanic languages, Catalan, Finnish, German, French, Portuguese and Spanish are all extensions of the Latin alphabet. The boosted characters are typically the ones that become corrupted, making texts but mildly unreadable with mojibake:
- å, ä, ö in Finnish and Swedish
- à, ç, è, é, ï, í, ò, ó, ú, ü in Catalan
- æ, ø, å in Norwegian and Danish
- á, é, ó, ij, è, ë, ï in Dutch
- ä, ö, ü, and ß in German
- á, ð, í, ó, ú, ý, æ, ø in Faroese
- á, ð, é, í, ó, ú, ý, þ, æ, ö in Icelandic
- à, â, ç, è, é, ë, ê, ï, î, ô, ù, û, ü, ÿ, æ, œ in French
- à, è, é, ì, ò, ù in Italian
- á, é, í, ñ, ó, ú, ü, ¡, ¿ in Spanish
- à, á, â, ã, ç, é, ê, í, ó, ô, õ, ú in Portuguese (ü no longer used)
- á, é, í, ó, ú in Irish
- à, è, ì, ò, ù in Scottish Gaelic
- £ in British English language
… and their majuscule counterparts, if applicable.
These are languages for which the ISO-8859-one character fix (also known as Latin 1 or Western) has been in use. Still, ISO-8859-ane has been obsoleted by ii competing standards, the backward compatible Windows-1252, and the slightly altered ISO-8859-15. Both add together the Euro sign € and the French œ, only otherwise any confusion of these three character sets does not create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, information technology is always safe to translate ISO-8859-ane as Windows-1252, and fairly prophylactic to translate it as ISO-8859-fifteen, in detail with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). However, with the advent of UTF-8, mojibake has become more than mutual in sure scenarios, e.g. exchange of text files between UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-8's incompatibility with Latin-one and Windows-1252. Just UTF-8 has the ability to exist directly recognised by a unproblematic algorithm, then that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-8 up with other encodings, so this was most mutual when many had software not supporting UTF-8. Most of these languages were supported by MS-DOS default CP437 and other machine default encodings, except ASCII, so problems when buying an operating system version were less mutual. Windows and MS-DOS are non compatible however.
In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and German, vowels are rarely repeated, and information technology is unremarkably obvious when 1 character gets corrupted, e.yard. the second letter in "kärlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This mode, even though the reader has to guess between å, ä and ö, almost all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other hand, does feature repeating vowels in words similar hääyö ("wedding nighttime") which can sometimes render text very difficult to read (east.g. hääyö appears as "hääyö"). Icelandic and Faroese have ten and eight possibly confounding characters, respectively, which thus can brand it more difficult to estimate corrupted characters; Icelandic words like þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") get virtually entirely unintelligible when rendered as "þjóðlöð".
In German language, Buchstabensalat ("letter salad") is a common term for this phenomenon, and in Castilian, deformación (literally deformation).
Some users transliterate their writing when using a computer, either by omitting the problematic diacritics, or by using digraph replacements (å → aa, ä/æ → ae, ö/ø → oe, ü → ue etc.). Thus, an writer might write "ueber" instead of "über", which is standard practice in German when umlauts are non available. The latter practice seems to be better tolerated in the German language language sphere than in the Nordic countries. For example, in Norwegian, digraphs are associated with archaic Danish, and may be used jokingly. However, digraphs are useful in communication with other parts of the globe. Equally an example, the Norwegian football player Ole Gunnar Solskjær had his proper noun spelled "SOLSKJAER" on his back when he played for Manchester United.
An artifact of UTF-8 misinterpreted as ISO-8859-1, "Ring meg nÃ¥" (" Ring 1000000 nå "), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Norway in June 2014.[five]
| Swedish case: | Smörgås (open up sandwich) | |
|---|---|---|
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Result |
| MS-DOS 437 | ISO 8859-one | Sm"rg†s |
| ISO 8859-1 | Mac Roman | SmˆrgÂs |
| UTF-eight | ISO 8859-1 | Smörgås |
| UTF-8 | Mac Roman | Smörgås |
Central and Eastern European [edit]
Users of Central and Eastern European languages tin can too be affected. Because virtually computers were not connected to any network during the mid- to late-1980s, at that place were different character encodings for every language with diacritical characters (see ISO/IEC 8859 and KOI-8), ofttimes also varying by operating organisation.
Hungarian [edit]
Hungarian is another affected language, which uses the 26 basic English characters, plus the accented forms á, é, í, ó, ú, ö, ü (all present in the Latin-i character fix), plus the ii characters ő and ű, which are not in Latin-1. These two characters can be correctly encoded in Latin-2, Windows-1250 and Unicode. Before Unicode became common in electronic mail clients, e-mails containing Hungarian text often had the letters ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the indicate of unrecognizability. It is common to answer to an e-mail rendered unreadable (run across examples below) past character mangling (referred to as "betűszemét", significant "letter of the alphabet garbage") with the phrase "Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép", a nonsense phrase (literally "Flood-resistant mirror-drilling machine") containing all accented characters used in Hungarian.
Examples [edit]
| Source encoding | Target encoding | Event | Occurrence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hungarian instance | ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép | Characters in red are wrong and practise not match the top-left instance. | |
| CP 852 | CP 437 | ╡RV╓ZTδRè TÜKÖRFΘRαGÉP árvízt√rï tükörfúrógép | This was very common in DOS-era when the text was encoded past the Central European CP 852 encoding; however, the operating system, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Please note that small-case letters are mainly right, exception with ő (ï) and ű (√). Ü/ü is correct because CP 852 was made uniform with German. Nowadays occurs mainly on printed prescriptions and cheques. |
| CWI-2 | CP 437 | ÅRVìZTÿRº TÜKÖRFùRòGÉP árvíztûrô tükörfúrógép | The CWI-2 encoding was designed so that the text remains fairly well-readable even if the display or printer uses the default CP 437 encoding. This encoding was heavily used in the 1980s and early 1990s, but nowadays it is completely deprecated. |
| Windows-1250 | Windows-1252 | ÁRVÍZTÛRÕ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztûrõ tükörfúrógép | The default Western Windows encoding is used instead of the Central-European one. Only ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are wrong, merely the text is completely readable. This is the most common error present; due to ignorance, it occurs often on webpages or even in printed media. |
| CP 852 | Windows-1250 | µRVÖZTëRŠ TšK™RFéRŕK P rvˇztűr‹ t k"rfŁr˘g‚p | Cardinal European Windows encoding is used instead of DOS encoding. The use of ű is correct. |
| Windows-1250 | CP 852 | ┴RV═ZT█RŇ T▄1000ÍRF┌RËYard╔P ßrvÝztűr§ tŘk÷rf˙rˇone thousandÚp | Fundamental European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The use of ű is correct. |
| Quoted-printable | seven-bit ASCII | =C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5 T=DCOne thousand=D6RF=DAR=D3One thousand=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F3g=E9p | Mainly caused by wrongly configured postal service servers only may occur in SMS letters on some cell-phones also. |
| UTF-8 | Windows-1252 | ÃRVÃZTÅ°RÅ TÃœOne thousandÖRFÚRÃ"MÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tüyardörfúrómép | Mainly caused past wrongly configured web services or webmail clients, which were not tested for international usage (as the problem remains concealed for English texts). In this case the actual (often generated) content is in UTF-8; however, it is not configured in the HTML headers, so the rendering engine displays it with the default Western encoding. |
Polish [edit]
Prior to the cosmos of ISO 8859-2 in 1987, users of various calculating platforms used their own character encodings such as AmigaPL on Amiga, Atari Club on Atari ST and Masovia, IBM CP852, Mazovia and Windows CP1250 on IBM PCs. Polish companies selling early DOS computers created their own mutually-incompatible ways to encode Shine characters and just reprogrammed the EPROMs of the video cards (typically CGA, EGA, or Hercules) to provide hardware code pages with the needed glyphs for Polish—arbitrarily located without reference to where other computer sellers had placed them.
The situation began to amend when, subsequently pressure from academic and user groups, ISO 8859-ii succeeded equally the "Internet standard" with limited support of the dominant vendors' software (today largely replaced past Unicode). With the numerous problems acquired by the variety of encodings, fifty-fifty today some users tend to refer to Polish diacritical characters as krzaczki ([kshach-kih], lit. "little shrubs").
Russian and other Cyrillic alphabets [edit]
Mojibake may be colloquially called krakozyabry ( кракозя́бры [krɐkɐˈzʲæbrɪ̈]) in Russian, which was and remains complicated by several systems for encoding Cyrillic.[6] The Soviet Union and early Russian federation developed KOI encodings ( Kod Obmena Informatsiey , Код Обмена Информацией , which translates to "Code for Information Exchange"). This began with Cyrillic-just 7-bit KOI7, based on ASCII but with Latin and some other characters replaced with Cyrillic messages. So came eight-bit KOI8 encoding that is an ASCII extension which encodes Cyrillic letters simply with loftier-bit fix octets corresponding to 7-bit codes from KOI7. It is for this reason that KOI8 text, even Russian, remains partially readable after stripping the 8th scrap, which was considered equally a major advantage in the age of 8BITMIME-unaware e-mail systems. For example, words " Школа русского языка " shkola russkogo yazyka , encoded in KOI8 and then passed through the high bit stripping procedure, end up rendered equally "[KOLA RUSSKOGO qZYKA". Eventually KOI8 gained different flavors for Russian and Bulgarian (KOI8-R), Ukrainian (KOI8-U), Belarusian (KOI8-RU) and even Tajik (KOI8-T).
Meanwhile, in the West, Code page 866 supported Ukrainian and Belarusian as well as Russian/Bulgarian in MS-DOS. For Microsoft Windows, Code Page 1251 added support for Serbian and other Slavic variants of Cyrillic.
Most recently, the Unicode encoding includes code points for practically all the characters of all the world's languages, including all Cyrillic characters.
Earlier Unicode, it was necessary to match text encoding with a font using the same encoding system. Failure to do this produced unreadable gibberish whose specific appearance varied depending on the verbal combination of text encoding and font encoding. For example, attempting to view non-Unicode Cyrillic text using a font that is express to the Latin alphabet, or using the default ("Western") encoding, typically results in text that consists almost entirely of vowels with diacritical marks. (KOI8 " Библиотека " ( biblioteka , library) becomes "âÉÂÌÉÏÔÅËÁ".) Using Windows codepage 1251 to view text in KOI8 or vice versa results in garbled text that consists mostly of capital letters (KOI8 and codepage 1251 share the aforementioned ASCII region, merely KOI8 has uppercase letters in the region where codepage 1251 has lowercase, and vice versa). In general, Cyrillic gibberish is symptomatic of using the wrong Cyrillic font. During the early years of the Russian sector of the World wide web, both KOI8 and codepage 1251 were common. Every bit of 2017, one can still come across HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, equally well equally Unicode. (An estimated one.7% of all web pages worldwide – all languages included – are encoded in codepage 1251.[7]) Though the HTML standard includes the power to specify the encoding for any given web folio in its source,[8] this is sometimes neglected, forcing the user to switch encodings in the browser manually.
In Bulgarian, mojibake is often called majmunica ( маймуница ), pregnant "monkey's [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is called đubre ( ђубре ), meaning "trash". Unlike the former USSR, Southward Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Page 1251 was the dominant Cyrillic encoding at that place before Unicode. Therefore, these languages experienced fewer encoding incompatibility troubles than Russian. In the 1980s, Bulgarian computers used their own MIK encoding, which is superficially similar to (although incompatible with) CP866.
| Russian example: | Кракозябры ( krakozyabry , garbage characters) | |
|---|---|---|
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Result |
| MS-DOS 855 | ISO 8859-i | Æá ÆÖóÞ¢áñ |
| KOI8-R | ISO 8859-1 | ëÒÁËÏÚÑÂÒÙ |
| UTF-eight | KOI8-R | п я─п╟п╨п╬п╥я▐п╠я─я▀ |
Yugoslav languages [edit]
Croatian, Bosnian, Serbian (the dialects of the Yugoslav Serbo-Croatian language) and Slovenian add to the basic Latin alphabet the messages š, đ, č, ć, ž, and their upper-case letter counterparts Š, Đ, Č, Ć, Ž (only č/Č, š/Š and ž/Ž in Slovenian; officially, although others are used when needed, mostly in strange names, every bit well). All of these letters are defined in Latin-ii and Windows-1250, while simply some (š, Š, ž, Ž, Đ) exist in the usual OS-default Windows-1252, and are at that place considering of some other languages.
Although Mojibake can occur with whatever of these characters, the messages that are not included in Windows-1252 are much more decumbent to errors. Thus, even nowadays, "šđčćž ŠĐČĆŽ" is oftentimes displayed every bit "šðèæž ŠÐÈÆŽ", although ð, è, æ, È, Æ are never used in Slavic languages.
When confined to basic ASCII (most user names, for example), common replacements are: š→s, đ→dj, č→c, ć→c, ž→z (capital forms analogously, with Đ→Dj or Đ→DJ depending on word case). All of these replacements introduce ambiguities, so reconstructing the original from such a form is usually washed manually if required.
The Windows-1252 encoding is important because the English versions of the Windows operating system are most widespread, non localized ones.[ citation needed ] The reasons for this include a relatively small-scale and fragmented market place, increasing the price of high quality localization, a loftier degree of software piracy (in plow caused by high price of software compared to income), which discourages localization efforts, and people preferring English versions of Windows and other software.[ citation needed ]
The drive to differentiate Croatian from Serbian, Bosnian from Croatian and Serbian, and now even Montenegrin from the other three creates many problems. There are many different localizations, using dissimilar standards and of unlike quality. At that place are no common translations for the vast corporeality of computer terminology originating in English language. In the end, people utilise adopted English words ("kompjuter" for "calculator", "kompajlirati" for "compile," etc.), and if they are unaccustomed to the translated terms may non understand what some option in a menu is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who understand English language, as well equally those who are accustomed to English terminology (who are nigh, because English terminology is also by and large taught in schools considering of these problems) regularly choose the original English language versions of non-specialist software.
When Cyrillic script is used (for Macedonian and partially Serbian), the trouble is similar to other Cyrillic-based scripts.
Newer versions of English Windows allow the lawmaking page to exist changed (older versions require special English versions with this support), but this setting can exist and frequently was incorrectly prepare. For example, Windows 98 and Windows Me tin be gear up to about not-right-to-left single-byte code pages including 1250, merely only at install time.
Caucasian languages [edit]
The writing systems of certain languages of the Caucasus region, including the scripts of Georgian and Armenian, may produce mojibake. This trouble is specially acute in the case of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a gear up of obsolete character encodings for the Armenian alphabet which take been superseded by Unicode standards. ArmSCII is not widely used because of a lack of support in the computer industry. For example, Microsoft Windows does non support it.
Asian encodings [edit]
Another blazon of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such every bit i of the encodings for East Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more than one (typically 2) characters are corrupted at once, eastward.thou. "k舐lek" ( kärlek ) in Swedish, where " är " is parsed as "舐". Compared to the in a higher place mojibake, this is harder to read, since letters unrelated to the problematic å, ä or ö are missing, and is especially problematic for brusk words starting with å, ä or ö such as "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since two messages are combined, the mojibake also seems more than random (over 50 variants compared to the normal three, non counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an unabridged text string which happens to include a pattern of particular word lengths, such every bit the judgement "Bush hid the facts", may be misinterpreted.
Vietnamese [edit]
In Vietnamese, the phenomenon is called chữ ma , loạn mã can occur when figurer attempt to encode diacritic character defined in Windows-1258, TCVN3 or VNI to UTF-8. Chữ ma was mutual in Vietnam when user was using Windows XP computer or using inexpensive mobile phone.
| Example: | Trăm năm trong cõi người ta (Truyện Kiều, Nguyễn Du) | |
|---|---|---|
| Original encoding | Target encoding | Result |
| Windows-1258 | UTF-8 | Trăm năm trong cõi ngÆ°á»i ta |
| TCVN3 | UTF-viii | Tr¨chiliad due north¨m trong câi ngêi ta |
| VNI (Windows) | UTF-8 | Traêthou northwardaêm trong coõi ngöôøi ta |
Japanese [edit]
In Japanese, the same phenomenon is, every bit mentioned, chosen mojibake ( 文字化け ). It is a item problem in Nihon due to the numerous different encodings that be for Japanese text. Alongside Unicode encodings like UTF-8 and UTF-16, in that location are other standard encodings, such every bit Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, equally well as being encountered by Japanese users, is besides oftentimes encountered by non-Japanese when attempting to run software written for the Japanese market.
Chinese [edit]
In Chinese, the same phenomenon is called Luàn mǎ (Pinyin, Simplified Chinese 乱码 , Traditional Chinese 亂碼 , meaning 'chaotic code'), and can occur when computerised text is encoded in one Chinese grapheme encoding but is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, it is often possible to fix the outcome past switching the character encoding without loss of data. The situation is complicated because of the existence of several Chinese graphic symbol encoding systems in use, the virtually common ones beingness: Unicode, Big5, and Guobiao (with several backward compatible versions), and the possibility of Chinese characters beingness encoded using Japanese encoding.
It is like shooting fish in a barrel to place the original encoding when luanma occurs in Guobiao encodings:
| Original encoding | Viewed as | Consequence | Original text | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big5 | GB | ?T瓣в变巨肚 | 三國志曹操傳 | Garbled Chinese characters with no hint of original significant. The red character is not a valid codepoint in GB2312. |
| Shift-JIS | GB | 暥帤壔偗僥僗僩 | 文字化けテスト | Kana is displayed every bit characters with the radical 亻, while kanji are other characters. Most of them are extremely uncommon and not in applied utilize in mod Chinese. |
| EUC-KR | GB | 叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨 | 디제이맥스 테크니카 | Random common Simplified Chinese characters which in most cases make no sense. Hands identifiable because of spaces between every several characters. |
An boosted problem is caused when encodings are missing characters, which is mutual with rare or antiquated characters that are still used in personal or place names. Examples of this are Taiwanese politicians Wang Chien-shien (Chinese: 王建煊; pinyin: Wáng Jiànxuān )'s "煊", Yu Shyi-kun (simplified Chinese: 游锡堃; traditional Chinese: 游錫堃; pinyin: Yóu Xíkūn )'s "堃" and vocalist David Tao (Chinese: 陶喆; pinyin: Táo Zhé )'s "喆" missing in Big5, ex-Prc Premier Zhu Rongji (Chinese: 朱镕基; pinyin: Zhū Róngjī )'due south "镕" missing in GB2312, copyright symbol "©" missing in GBK.[9]
Newspapers have dealt with this problem in various ways, including using software to combine two existing, similar characters; using a picture of the personality; or simply substituting a homophone for the rare character in the hope that the reader would be able to make the correct inference.
Indic text [edit]
A similar effect tin occur in Brahmic or Indic scripts of South asia, used in such Indo-Aryan or Indic languages equally Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu), Bengali, Punjabi, Marä thi, and others, fifty-fifty if the character fix employed is properly recognized by the application. This is because, in many Indic scripts, the rules by which individual letter symbols combine to create symbols for syllables may not be properly understood by a computer missing the appropriate software, even if the glyphs for the individual letter forms are available.
One example of this is the former Wikipedia logo, which attempts to bear witness the graphic symbol analogous to "wi" (the kickoff syllable of "Wikipedia") on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle piece meant to carry the Devanagari character for "wi" instead used to brandish the "wa" character followed by an unpaired "i" modifier vowel, hands recognizable every bit mojibake generated past a computer not configured to display Indic text.[10] The logo every bit redesigned as of May 2010[ref] has fixed these errors.
The idea of Plain Text requires the operating system to provide a font to brandish Unicode codes. This font is dissimilar from Bone to OS for Singhala and it makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters (syllables) beyond all operating systems. For instance, the 'reph', the brusque form for 'r' is a diacritic that normally goes on height of a manifestly letter. However, information technology is incorrect to go on top of some letters like 'ya' or 'la' in specific contexts. For Sanskritic words or names inherited by modern languages, such as कार्य, IAST: kārya, or आर्या, IAST: āryā, it is apt to put it on top of these letters. By dissimilarity, for like sounds in modern languages which result from their specific rules, information technology is not put on pinnacle, such as the give-and-take करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stem course of the mutual word करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marāthi linguistic communication.[eleven] Simply it happens in most operating systems. This appears to be a fault of internal programming of the fonts. In Mac OS and iOS, the muurdhaja l (dark 50) and 'u' combination and its long form both yield wrong shapes.[ commendation needed ]
Some Indic and Indic-derived scripts, most notably Lao, were not officially supported by Windows XP until the release of Vista.[12] However, various sites have made free-to-download fonts.
Burmese [edit]
Due to Western sanctions[13] and the tardily inflow of Burmese language back up in computers,[14] [15] much of the early Burmese localization was homegrown without international cooperation. The prevailing ways of Burmese support is via the Zawgyi font, a font that was created as a Unicode font merely was in fact only partially Unicode compliant.[15] In the Zawgyi font, some codepoints for Burmese script were implemented equally specified in Unicode, but others were non.[16] The Unicode Consortium refers to this as ad hoc font encodings.[17] With the advent of mobile phones, mobile vendors such as Samsung and Huawei only replaced the Unicode compliant organisation fonts with Zawgyi versions.[xiv]
Due to these ad hoc encodings, communications between users of Zawgyi and Unicode would return equally garbled text. To get around this consequence, content producers would make posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.[xviii] Myanmar regime has designated 1 October 2019 equally "U-Day" to officially switch to Unicode.[thirteen] The full transition is estimated to take two years.[19]
African languages [edit]
In certain writing systems of Africa, unencoded text is unreadable. Texts that may produce mojibake include those from the Horn of Africa such as the Ge'ez script in Ethiopia and Eritrea, used for Amharic, Tigre, and other languages, and the Somali linguistic communication, which employs the Osmanya alphabet. In Southern Africa, the Mwangwego alphabet is used to write languages of Malawi and the Mandombe alphabet was created for the Congo-kinshasa, but these are not generally supported. Various other writing systems native to West Africa present like bug, such equally the North'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Liberia.
Arabic [edit]
Another affected language is Arabic (meet below). The text becomes unreadable when the encodings practise not match.
Examples [edit]
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Arabic instance: |  (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) | |
| Browser rendering: | الإعلان العالمى لحقوق الإنسان | |
| UTF-8 | Windows-1252 | الإعلان العالمى Ù„Øقوق الإنسان |
| KOI8-R | О╩©ь╖ы└ь╔ь╧ы└ь╖ы├ ь╖ы└ь╧ь╖ы└ы┘ы┴ ы└ь╜ы┌ы┬ы┌ ь╖ы└ь╔ы├ьЁь╖ы├ | |
| ISO 8859-5 | яЛПиЇй�иЅиЙй�иЇй� иЇй�иЙиЇй�й�й� й�ий�й�й� иЇй�иЅй�иГиЇй� | |
| CP 866 | я╗┐╪з┘Д╪е╪╣┘Д╪з┘Ж ╪з┘Д╪╣╪з┘Д┘Е┘Й ┘Д╪н┘В┘И┘В ╪з┘Д╪е┘Ж╪│╪з┘Ж | |
| ISO 8859-vi | ُ؛؟ظ�ع�ظ�ظ�ع�ظ�ع� ظ�ع�ظ�ظ�ع�ع�ع� ع�ظع�ع�ع� ظ�ع�ظ�ع�ظ�ظ�ع� | |
| ISO 8859-ii | اŮ�ŘĽŘšŮ�اŮ� اŮ�ؚاŮ�Ů�Ů� Ů�ŘŮ�Ů�Ů� اŮ�ŘĽŮ�ساŮ� | |
| Windows-1256 | Windows-1252 | ÇáÅÚáÇä ÇáÚÇáãì áÍÞæÞ ÇáÅäÓÇä |
The examples in this commodity practise not have UTF-eight as browser setting, because UTF-8 is hands recognisable, and then if a browser supports UTF-viii information technology should recognise it automatically, and not endeavor to interpret something else as UTF-eight.
See as well [edit]
- Code point
- Replacement grapheme
- Substitute character
- Newline – The conventions for representing the line break differ between Windows and Unix systems. Though most software supports both conventions (which is trivial), software that must preserve or brandish the difference (due east.thou. version control systems and data comparison tools) can get substantially more difficult to use if not adhering to one convention.
- Byte order marking – The most in-ring way to store the encoding together with the data – prepend it. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, simply will past design be perceived as "garbage characters" to incompliant software (including many interpreters).
- HTML entities – An encoding of special characters in HTML, mostly optional, merely required for certain characters to escape interpretation every bit markup.
While failure to utilize this transformation is a vulnerability (see cross-site scripting), applying information technology also many times results in garbling of these characters. For example, the quotation marking
"becomes",","and so on. - Bush-league hid the facts
References [edit]
- ^ a b King, Ritchie (2012). "Will unicode soon be the universal code? [The Data]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (7): 60. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
- ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "coil -five linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved 5 Oct 2018.
- ^ "Guidelines for extended attributes". 2013-05-17. Retrieved 2015-02-15 .
- ^ "Unicode mailinglist on the Eudora e-mail client". 2001-05-13. Retrieved 2014-11-01 .
- ^ "sms-scam". June 18, 2014. Retrieved June 19, 2014.
- ^ p. 141, Control + Alt + Delete: A Lexicon of Cyberslang, Jonathon Keats, Globe Pequot, 2007, ISBN ane-59921-039-8.
- ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
- ^ "Declaring graphic symbol encodings in HTML".
- ^ "Prc GBK (XGB)". Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2002-10-01. Conversion map betwixt Lawmaking page 936 and Unicode. Demand manually selecting GB18030 or GBK in browser to view it correctly.
- ^ Cohen, Noam (June 25, 2007). "Some Errors Defy Fixes: A Typo in Wikipedia'south Logo Fractures the Sanskrit". The New York Times . Retrieved July 17, 2009.
- ^ https://marāthi.indiatyping.com/
- ^ "Content Moved (Windows)". Msdn.microsoft.com. Retrieved 2014-02-05 .
- ^ a b "Unicode in, Zawgyi out: Modernity finally catches up in Myanmar's digital globe". The Japan Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
October. ane is "U-Day", when Myanmar officially will adopt the new system.... Microsoft and Apple helped other countries standardize years agone, but Western sanctions meant Myanmar lost out.
- ^ a b Hotchkiss, Griffin (March 23, 2016). "Boxing of the fonts". Frontier Myanmar . Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
With the release of Windows XP service pack ii, complex scripts were supported, which made it possible for Windows to render a Unicode-compliant Burmese font such as Myanmar1 (released in 2005). ... Myazedi, BIT, and later Zawgyi, circumscribed the rendering problem by adding extra code points that were reserved for Myanmar'due south ethnic languages. Not only does the re-mapping prevent future indigenous language support, it also results in a typing system that tin be confusing and inefficient, even for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the two most popular smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated only past capturing the largest market share, which means they support Zawgyi out of the box.
- ^ a b Sin, Thant (vii September 2019). "Unified under one font organization as Myanmar prepares to drift from Zawgyi to Unicode". Ascent Voices . Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
Standard Myanmar Unicode fonts were never mainstreamed different the private and partially Unicode compliant Zawgyi font. ... Unicode will improve natural language processing
- ^ "Why Unicode is Needed". Google Code: Zawgyi Project . Retrieved 31 Oct 2013.
- ^ "Myanmar Scripts and Languages". Often Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 24 December 2019.
"UTF-8" technically does non use to ad hoc font encodings such as Zawgyi.
- ^ LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019). "Integrating autoconversion: Facebook's path from Zawgyi to Unicode - Facebook Engineering". Facebook Engineering. Facebook. Retrieved 25 Dec 2019.
It makes communication on digital platforms difficult, as content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. ... In order to meliorate accomplish their audiences, content producers in Myanmar oftentimes mail in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a single post, not to mention English or other languages.
- ^ Saw Yi Nanda (21 November 2019). "Myanmar switch to Unicode to take two years: app programmer". The Myanmar Times . Retrieved 24 December 2019.
External links [edit]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake
Post a Comment for "ââåno Art to Find the Mindã¢ââ¢s Construction in the Faceã¢ââ Why Is This Line Ironic"