Mã¡âºâ·t Nã¡âºâ¡ Ä‘ã¡âºâ¥t Sãƒâ©t the Body Shop Review
Mojibake (Japanese: 文字化け; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the result of text beingness decoded using an unintended character encoding.[1] The result is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, oft from a different writing system.
This brandish may include the generic replacement character ("�") in places where the binary representation is considered invalid. A replacement tin 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 abiding length encoding (as in Asian 16-bit encodings vs European 8-bit encodings), or the employ of variable length encodings (notably UTF-8 and UTF-16).
Failed rendering of glyphs due to either missing fonts or missing glyphs in a font is a unlike consequence that is non to be confused with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the code bespeak displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement character. Importantly, these replacements are valid and are the event of correct mistake handling by the software.
Etymology [edit]
Mojibake ways "grapheme transformation" in Japanese. The word is composed of 文字 (moji, IPA: [mod͡ʑi]), "character" and 化け (bake, 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. As mojibake is the instance of non-compliance between these, it can be achieved past manipulating the data itself, or just relabeling it.
Mojibake is often seen with text data that have been tagged with a wrong encoding; information technology may not even be tagged at all, just moved betwixt computers with different default encodings. A major source of trouble are communication protocols that rely on settings on each estimator rather than sending or storing metadata together with the information.
The differing default settings between computers are in office due to differing deployments of Unicode amongst operating organisation families, and partly the legacy encodings' specializations for different writing systems of human languages. Whereas Linux distributions mostly switched to UTF-8 in 2004,[ii] Microsoft Windows generally uses UTF-sixteen, and sometimes uses 8-bit 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 run into mojibake relatively often. Equally a Japanese case, the give-and-take mojibake "文字化け" stored as EUC-JP might be incorrectly displayed every bit "ﾊｸｻ�ｽ､ｱ", "ﾊｸｻ嵂ｽ､ｱ" (MS-932), or "ﾊｸｻ郾ｽ､ｱ" (Shift JIS-2004). The same text stored equally UTF-8 is displayed every bit "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 equally "æ–‡å—化ã'" in software that assumes text to be in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-one encodings, usually labelled Western, or (for example) as "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted as being in a GBK (China) locale.
| Original text | 文 | 字 | 化 | け | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw bytes of EUC-JP encoding | CA | B8 | BB | FA | B2 | BD | A4 | B1 |
| Bytes interpreted every bit Shift-JIS encoding | ﾊ | ｸ | ｻ | 郾 | ｽ | ､ | ｱ | |
| Bytes interpreted as ISO-8859-one encoding | Ê | ¸ | » | ú | ² | ½ | ¤ | ± |
| Bytes interpreted every bit GBK encoding | 矢 | 机 | 步 | け | ||||
Underspecification [edit]
If the encoding is not specified, it is upward to the software to decide it by other ways. Depending on the type of software, the typical solution is either configuration or charset detection heuristics. Both are prone to mis-prediction in not-so-uncommon scenarios.
The encoding of text files is affected by locale setting, which depends on the user's language, brand 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 same system. For Unicode, 1 solution is to use a byte order marking, but for source lawmaking and other car readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Another is storing the encoding as metadata in the file organisation. File systems that back up extended file attributes can store this as user.charset.[3] This also requires support in software that wants to take advantage of it, merely 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 (see charset detection). A web browser may not be able to distinguish a page coded in EUC-JP and another 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 send the proper HTTP headers; run across character encodings in HTML.
Mis-specification [edit]
Mojibake also occurs when the encoding is wrongly specified. This oftentimes happens between encodings that are similar. For example, the Eudora electronic mail client for Windows was known to send emails labelled as ISO-8859-ane that were in reality Windows-1252.[4] The Mac OS version of Eudora did not exhibit this behaviour. Windows-1252 contains extra printable characters in the C1 range (the virtually frequently seen beingness curved quotation marks and extra dashes), that were not displayed properly in software complying with the ISO standard; this particularly affected software running under other operating systems such every bit Unix.
Human ignorance [edit]
Of the encodings still in apply, many are partially compatible with each other, with ASCII equally the predominant common subset. This sets the stage for man ignorance:
- Compatibility can exist a deceptive property, as the common subset of characters is unaffected past a mixup of two encodings (come across Problems in unlike writing systems).
- People think they are using ASCII, and tend to label whatever superset of ASCII they actually apply every bit "ASCII". Maybe for simplification, merely fifty-fifty in bookish literature, the word "ASCII" tin can be institute used as an case of something non compatible with Unicode, where evidently "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-viii.[i] Note that UTF-8 is backwards uniform with ASCII.
Overspecification [edit]
When there are layers of protocols, each trying to specify the encoding based on different information, the to the lowest degree certain data may exist misleading to the recipient. For example, consider a web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The character set may be communicated to the customer in any number of 3 means:
- in the HTTP header. This information tin can be based on server configuration (for instance, when serving a file off disk) or controlled by the awarding running on the server (for dynamic websites).
- in the file, as an HTML meta tag (
http-equivorcharset) or theencodingattribute of an XML declaration. This is the encoding that the author meant to save the detail file in. - in the file, as a byte order mark. This is the encoding that the author's editor actually saved it in. Unless an accidental encoding conversion has happened (by opening it in one encoding and saving it in another), this will be correct. It is, however, only available in Unicode encodings such as UTF-8 or UTF-16.
Lack of hardware or software support [edit]
Much older hardware is typically designed to support only one character set and the graphic symbol ready typically cannot be altered. The character table contained within the display firmware will be localized to have characters for the country the device is to be sold in, and typically the table differs from country to land. As such, these systems will potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a system from a different country. Also, many early operating systems practise not back up multiple encoding formats and thus will end upwards displaying mojibake if fabricated to display non-standard text—early versions of Microsoft Windows and Palm Bone for example, are localized on a per-country basis and will only support encoding standards relevant to the country the localized version will be sold in, and will display mojibake if a file containing a text in a different encoding format from the version that the OS is designed to support is opened.
Resolutions [edit]
Applications using UTF-8 equally a default encoding may attain a greater caste of interoperability because of its widespread employ and backward compatibility with US-ASCII. UTF-8 also has the ability to exist direct recognised by a simple algorithm, then that well written software should be able to avert mixing UTF-eight upwards with other encodings.
The difficulty of resolving an instance of mojibake varies depending on the application within which information technology occurs and the causes of it. Two of the most mutual applications in which mojibake may occur are web browsers and word processors. Modern browsers and word processors often support a broad assortment of graphic symbol encodings. Browsers often let a user to change their rendering engine'southward encoding setting on the fly, while give-and-take processors allow the user to select the appropriate encoding when opening a file. It may take some trial and error for users to find the correct encoding.
The problem gets more complicated when it occurs in an application that normally does non support a wide range of character encoding, such equally in a not-Unicode calculator 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 tin can also cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or later, a user likewise has the selection to utilize Microsoft AppLocale, an awarding that allows the irresolute of per-application locale settings. Yet, changing the operating system encoding settings is non possible on earlier operating systems such equally Windows 98; to resolve this issue on earlier operating systems, a user would take to use third party font rendering applications.
Bug in different writing systems [edit]
English [edit]
Mojibake in English texts generally occurs in punctuation, such as em dashes (—), en dashes (–), and curly quotes (",",','), but rarely in character text, since most encodings agree with ASCII on the encoding of the English alphabet. For example, the pound sign "£" volition appear as "£" if it was encoded past the sender as UTF-8 just interpreted by the recipient every bit CP1252 or ISO 8859-1. If iterated using CP1252, this can atomic number 82 to "£", "£", "ÃÆ'‚£", etc.
Some computers did, in older eras, have vendor-specific encodings which caused mismatch also for English language text. Commodore brand 8-scrap computers used PETSCII encoding, particularly notable for inverting the upper and lower example compared to standard ASCII. PETSCII printers worked fine on other computers of the era, but flipped the example of all letters. IBM mainframes use the EBCDIC encoding which does non match ASCII at all.
Other Western European languages [edit]
The alphabets of the North Germanic languages, Catalan, Finnish, High german, French, Portuguese and Spanish are all extensions of the Latin alphabet. The additional characters are typically the ones that get 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 Faeroese
- 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
… and their uppercase counterparts, if applicable.
These are languages for which the ISO-8859-i character set up (also known every bit Latin 1 or Western) has been in utilise. However, ISO-8859-one has been obsoleted by two competing standards, the backward compatible Windows-1252, and the slightly altered ISO-8859-15. Both add together the Euro sign € and the French œ, but otherwise any confusion of these iii character sets does non create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is always safe to interpret ISO-8859-1 as Windows-1252, and adequately prophylactic to interpret information technology as ISO-8859-15, in particular with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). Still, with the advent of UTF-8, mojibake has go more common in certain scenarios, e.g. commutation of text files between UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-eight's incompatibility with Latin-one and Windows-1252. But UTF-8 has the ability to be directly recognised by a simple algorithm, so that well written software should exist able to avert mixing UTF-8 up with other encodings, so this was virtually common when many had software not supporting UTF-8. Most of these languages were supported past MS-DOS default CP437 and other machine default encodings, except ASCII, so bug when buying an operating system version were less common. Windows and MS-DOS are non compatible all the same.
In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and High german, vowels are rarely repeated, and information technology is commonly obvious when 1 character gets corrupted, due east.1000. the second letter in "kärlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This way, even though the reader has to guess between å, ä and ö, about all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other hand, does feature repeating vowels in words like hääyö ("wedding dark") which can sometimes render text very difficult to read (e.g. hääyö appears every bit "hääyö"). Icelandic and Faeroese have ten and eight possibly confounding characters, respectively, which thus tin make it more than hard to gauge corrupted characters; Icelandic words like þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") become almost entirely unintelligible when rendered every bit "þjóðlöð".
In German, Buchstabensalat ("letter salad") is a common term for this miracle, and in Spanish, deformación (literally deformation).
Some users transliterate their writing when using a calculator, either by omitting the problematic diacritics, or by using digraph replacements (å → aa, ä/æ → ae, ö/ø → oe, ü → ue etc.). Thus, an author might write "ueber" instead of "über", which is standard practice in German when umlauts are non bachelor. The latter practice seems to be meliorate tolerated in the German linguistic communication sphere than in the Nordic countries. For example, in Norwegian, digraphs are associated with archaic Danish, and may be used jokingly. Notwithstanding, digraphs are useful in communication with other parts of the world. Every bit an case, the Norwegian football role player Ole Gunnar Solskjær had his proper name spelled "SOLSKJAER" on his back when he played for Manchester United.
An artifact of UTF-viii misinterpreted as ISO-8859-1, "Ring meg nÃ¥" (" Band meg nå "), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Norway in June 2014.[five]
| Swedish example: | Smörgås (open sandwich) | |
|---|---|---|
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Result |
| MS-DOS 437 | ISO 8859-1 | Sm"rg†south |
| ISO 8859-1 | Mac Roman | SmˆrgÂs |
| UTF-eight | ISO 8859-one | Smörgådue south |
| UTF-8 | Mac Roman | Smörgås |
Central and Eastern European [edit]
Users of Cardinal and Eastern European languages can also exist affected. Because about computers were not connected to any network during the mid- to late-1980s, there were dissimilar grapheme encodings for every language with diacritical characters (meet ISO/IEC 8859 and KOI-8), oftentimes also varying by operating system.
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 set), plus the 2 characters ő and ű, which are not in Latin-i. These 2 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 oftentimes had the letters ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the point of unrecognizability. It is mutual to respond to an eastward-mail rendered unreadable (see examples below) by graphic symbol mangling (referred to as "betűszemét", pregnant "letter garbage") with the phrase "Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép", a nonsense phrase (literally "Flood-resistant mirror-drilling auto") containing all accented characters used in Hungarian.
Examples [edit]
| Source encoding | Target encoding | Upshot | Occurrence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hungarian example | ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép | Characters in red are incorrect and do not match the meridian-left example. | |
| CP 852 | CP 437 | ╡RV╓ZTδRè TÜKÖRFΘRαGÉP árvízt√rï tükörfúrógép | This was very mutual in DOS-era when the text was encoded past the Central European CP 852 encoding; however, the operating organization, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Please note that pocket-size-case letters are mainly correct, exception with ő (ï) and ű (√). Ü/ü is correct considering CP 852 was made compatible 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 on 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 Primal-European one. Only ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are wrong, but the text is completely readable. This is the most common error nowadays; due to ignorance, information technology occurs often on webpages or fifty-fifty in printed media. |
| CP 852 | Windows-1250 | µRVÖZTëRŠ TšChiliad™RFéRŕChiliad P rvˇztűr‹ t k"rfŁr˘g‚p | Central European Windows encoding is used instead of DOS encoding. The utilise of ű is correct. |
| Windows-1250 | CP 852 | ┴RV═ZT█RŇ T▄ThousandÍRF┌RËG╔P ßrvÝztűr§ tŘk÷rf˙rˇgrandÚp | Central European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The use of ű is correct. |
| Quoted-printable | vii-bit ASCII | =C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5 T=DCYard=D6RF=DAR=D3One thousand=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F3m=E9p | Mainly caused by wrongly configured mail servers but may occur in SMS messages on some cell-phones as well. |
| UTF-8 | Windows-1252 | ÃRVÃZTÅ°RÅ TÃœKÖRFÚRÃ"GÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tükörfúróthouép | Mainly caused by wrongly configured web services or webmail clients, which were not tested for international usage (equally the trouble remains concealed for English language texts). In this case the actual (oftentimes generated) content is in UTF-8; however, it is not configured in the HTML headers, then the rendering engine displays it with the default Western encoding. |
Polish [edit]
Prior to the creation of ISO 8859-2 in 1987, users of various calculating platforms used their ain grapheme encodings such equally AmigaPL on Amiga, Atari Lodge 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 Polish characters and only reprogrammed the EPROMs of the video cards (typically CGA, EGA, or Hercules) to provide hardware code pages with the needed glyphs for Smooth—arbitrarily located without reference to where other computer sellers had placed them.
The situation began to amend when, afterward pressure from bookish and user groups, ISO 8859-2 succeeded as the "Cyberspace standard" with limited support of the dominant vendors' software (today largely replaced by Unicode). With the numerous bug acquired by the variety of encodings, even 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 adult KOI encodings ( Kod Obmena Informatsiey , Код Обмена Информацией , which translates to "Code for Data Substitution"). This began with Cyrillic-only 7-bit KOI7, based on ASCII but with Latin and some other characters replaced with Cyrillic messages. And then came viii-bit KOI8 encoding that is an ASCII extension which encodes Cyrillic letters only with high-flake set octets corresponding to 7-scrap codes from KOI7. It is for this reason that KOI8 text, fifty-fifty Russian, remains partially readable after stripping the eighth fleck, which was considered every bit a major reward in the historic period of 8BITMIME-unaware email systems. For instance, words " Школа русского языка " shkola russkogo yazyka , encoded in KOI8 and and then passed through the high bit stripping procedure, stop up rendered every bit "[KOLA RUSSKOGO qZYKA". Somewhen KOI8 gained unlike 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 Byelorussian as well as Russian/Bulgarian in MS-DOS. For Microsoft Windows, Code Folio 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 earth's languages, including all Cyrillic characters.
Before Unicode, it was necessary to match text encoding with a font using the same encoding arrangement. 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 limited 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, simply KOI8 has uppercase letters in the region where codepage 1251 has lowercase, and vice versa). In general, Cyrillic gibberish is symptomatic of using the incorrect Cyrillic font. During the early on years of the Russian sector of the World wide web, both KOI8 and codepage 1251 were common. Equally of 2017, one can nonetheless encounter HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, besides as Unicode. (An estimated 1.seven% of all spider web pages worldwide – all languages included – are encoded in codepage 1251.[vii]) Though the HTML standard includes the ability to specify the encoding for any given web page in its source,[viii] this is sometimes neglected, forcing the user to switch encodings in the browser manually.
In Bulgarian, mojibake is often called majmunica ( маймуница ), significant "monkey'due south [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is chosen đubre ( ђубре ), meaning "trash". Unlike the erstwhile USSR, South Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Page 1251 was the ascendant Cyrillic encoding there 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 | Consequence |
| MS-DOS 855 | ISO 8859-1 | Æá ÆÖóÞ¢áñ |
| KOI8-R | ISO 8859-1 | ëÒÁËÏÚÑÂÒÙ |
| UTF-viii | KOI8-R | п я─п╟п╨п╬п╥я▐п╠я─я▀ |
Yugoslav languages [edit]
Croatian, Bosnian, Serbian (the dialects of the Yugoslav Serbo-Croation language) and Slovenian add together to the bones Latin alphabet the letters š, đ, č, ć, ž, and their capital counterparts Š, Đ, Č, Ć, Ž (only č/Č, š/Š and ž/Ž in Slovene; officially, although others are used when needed, mostly in foreign names, every bit well). All of these letters are divers in Latin-two and Windows-1250, while only some (š, Š, ž, Ž, Đ) be in the usual Bone-default Windows-1252, and are there because of another languages.
Although Mojibake can occur with any of these characters, the letters that are not included in Windows-1252 are much more than decumbent to errors. Thus, even nowadays, "šđčćž ŠĐČĆŽ" is often displayed as "šðèæž ŠÐÈÆŽ", although ð, è, æ, È, Æ are never used in Slavic languages.
When bars 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 give-and-take case). All of these replacements innovate 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 organization are near widespread, not localized ones.[ commendation needed ] The reasons for this include a relatively pocket-size and fragmented market, increasing the price of high quality localization, a high degree of software piracy (in turn caused past loftier 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 at present even Montenegrin from the other three creates many problems. There are many dissimilar localizations, using different standards and of different quality. There are no mutual translations for the vast amount of computer terminology originating in English language. In the end, people use adopted English words ("kompjuter" for "estimator", "kompajlirati" for "compile," etc.), and if they are unaccustomed to the translated terms may non sympathise what some selection in a menu is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who understand English, as well every bit those who are accustomed to English language terminology (who are about, because English terminology is also mostly taught in schools because of these problems) regularly cull the original English language versions of non-specialist software.
When Cyrillic script is used (for Macedonian and partially Serbian), the problem is similar to other Cyrillic-based scripts.
Newer versions of English Windows permit the code folio to be changed (older versions require special English versions with this support), but this setting can be and often was incorrectly set. For example, Windows 98 and Windows Me can be set to most not-right-to-left unmarried-byte code pages including 1250, but just 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 problem is particularly acute in the case of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a set of obsolete character encodings for the Armenian alphabet which have been superseded by Unicode standards. ArmSCII is non widely used because of a lack of support in the computer industry. For instance, Microsoft Windows does not support information technology.
Asian encodings [edit]
Some other type of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such every bit one of the encodings for East Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more than i (typically ii) characters are corrupted at one time, e.g. "k舐lek" ( kärlek ) in Swedish, where " är " is parsed equally "舐". Compared to the above mojibake, this is harder to read, since letters unrelated to the problematic å, ä or ö are missing, and is particularly problematic for short words starting with å, ä or ö such as "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since ii letters are combined, the mojibake also seems more than random (over 50 variants compared to the normal three, not counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an entire text string which happens to include a design of detail word lengths, such as the sentence "Bush hid the facts", may be misinterpreted.
Vietnamese [edit]
In Vietnamese, the phenomenon is called chữ ma , loạn mã can occur when computer try to encode diacritic grapheme defined in Windows-1258, TCVN3 or VNI to UTF-viii. Chữ ma was common in Vietnam when user was using Windows XP reckoner or using cheap mobile telephone.
| Example: | Trăm năm trong cõi người ta (Truyện Kiều, Nguyễn Du) | |
|---|---|---|
| Original encoding | Target encoding | Consequence |
| Windows-1258 | UTF-8 | Trăthousand năm trong cõi ngÆ°á»i ta |
| TCVN3 | UTF-eight | Tr¨m n¨m trong câi ngêi ta |
| VNI (Windows) | UTF-eight | Traêm naêone thousand trong coõi ngöôøi ta |
Japanese [edit]
In Japanese, the same miracle is, every bit mentioned, chosen mojibake ( 文字化け ). It is a particular problem in Nihon due to the numerous different encodings that exist for Japanese text. Alongside Unicode encodings similar UTF-eight and UTF-16, there are other standard encodings, such equally Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, as well as beingness encountered by Japanese users, is also 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 , pregnant 'chaotic code'), and tin can occur when computerised text is encoded in one Chinese character encoding but is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, it is often possible to fix the issue by switching the character encoding without loss of data. The situation is complicated because of the existence of several Chinese character encoding systems in employ, the most common ones being: Unicode, Big5, and Guobiao (with several backward uniform versions), and the possibility of Chinese characters beingness encoded using Japanese encoding.
It is easy to place the original encoding when luanma occurs in Guobiao encodings:
| Original encoding | Viewed as | Result | 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 meaning. The carmine character is non 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 equally characters with the radical 亻, while kanji are other characters. Most of them are extremely uncommon and not in practical utilize in modern Chinese. |
| EUC-KR | GB | 叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨 | 디제이맥스 테크니카 | Random common Simplified Chinese characters which in nearly cases make no sense. Easily identifiable because of spaces betwixt every several characters. |
An boosted problem is caused when encodings are missing characters, which is common with rare or blowsy characters that are even so 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 )'due south "堃" and singer David Tao (Chinese: 陶喆; pinyin: Táo Zhé )'south "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.[nine]
Newspapers have dealt with this trouble in various ways, including using software to combine ii existing, like characters; using a flick of the personality; or simply substituting a homophone for the rare graphic symbol in the promise that the reader would be able to make the correct inference.
Indic text [edit]
A like upshot can occur in Brahmic or Indic scripts of South Asia, used in such Indo-Aryan or Indic languages every bit Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu), Bengali, Punjabi, Marathi, and others, even if the graphic symbol ready employed is properly recognized by the application. This is considering, in many Indic scripts, the rules by which private letter symbols combine to create symbols for syllables may not be properly understood past a computer missing the appropriate software, fifty-fifty if the glyphs for the private letter forms are available.
One example of this is the old Wikipedia logo, which attempts to show the character analogous to "wi" (the first syllable of "Wikipedia") on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle piece meant to acquit the Devanagari character for "wi" instead used to brandish the "wa" character followed by an unpaired "i" modifier vowel, easily recognizable equally mojibake generated by a calculator not configured to display Indic text.[10] The logo equally redesigned as of May 2010[ref] has stock-still these errors.
The idea of Evidently Text requires the operating organization to provide a font to brandish Unicode codes. This font is unlike from OS to Bone for Singhala and information technology makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters (syllables) beyond all operating systems. For instance, the 'reph', the short form for 'r' is a diacritic that unremarkably goes on top of a plain letter. However, it is wrong to go on top of some letters similar 'ya' or 'la' in specific contexts. For Sanskritic words or names inherited by modern languages, such every bit कार्य, IAST: kārya, or आर्या, IAST: āryā, it is apt to put it on meridian of these letters. By contrast, for similar sounds in modern languages which result from their specific rules, it is not put on pinnacle, such as the word करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stalk form of the common word करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marāthi language.[11] But 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 class both yield wrong shapes.[ citation needed ]
Some Indic and Indic-derived scripts, most notably Lao, were non officially supported by Windows XP until the release of Vista.[12] However, diverse sites accept made gratuitous-to-download fonts.
Burmese [edit]
Due to Western sanctions[13] and the late inflow of Burmese language back up in computers,[14] [15] much of the early Burmese localization was homegrown without international cooperation. The prevailing means 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 every bit specified in Unicode, only others were not.[16] The Unicode Consortium refers to this equally ad hoc font encodings.[17] With the appearance of mobile phones, mobile vendors such as Samsung and Huawei simply replaced the Unicode compliant organization fonts with Zawgyi versions.[14]
Due to these ad hoc encodings, communications between users of Zawgyi and Unicode would render as garbled text. To go around this issue, content producers would make posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.[18] Myanmar government has designated i October 2019 every bit "U-Day" to officially switch to Unicode.[13] The full transition is estimated to have two years.[19]
African languages [edit]
In sure writing systems of Africa, unencoded text is unreadable. Texts that may produce mojibake include those from the Horn of Africa such every bit the Ge'ez script in Federal democratic republic of ethiopia and Eritrea, used for Amharic, Tigre, and other languages, and the Somali language, 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 Autonomous Republic of the Congo, simply these are not generally supported. Various other writing systems native to West Africa present like bug, such as the North'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Republic of liberia.
Standard arabic [edit]
Another affected linguistic communication is Arabic (see below). The text becomes unreadable when the encodings practice not match.
Examples [edit]
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Issue |
|---|---|---|
| Arabic example: |  (Universal Declaration of Homo Rights) | |
| Browser rendering: | الإعلان العالمى لحقوق الإنسان | |
| UTF-viii | 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 8859-6 | ُ؛؟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 8859-2 | 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 article practise non have UTF-eight as browser setting, considering UTF-eight is hands recognisable, and so if a browser supports UTF-8 it should recognise it automatically, and not try to interpret something else as UTF-8.
See also [edit]
- Code bespeak
- Replacement character
- Substitute character
- Newline – The conventions for representing the line suspension differ between Windows and Unix systems. Though nigh software supports both conventions (which is fiddling), software that must preserve or display the divergence (eastward.g. version control systems and data comparison tools) can get essentially more than difficult to utilize if not adhering to ane convention.
- Byte order mark – The near in-band way to store the encoding together with the data – prepend it. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, but volition by pattern be perceived equally "garbage characters" to incompliant software (including many interpreters).
- HTML entities – An encoding of special characters in HTML, mostly optional, only required for sure characters to escape estimation as markup.
While failure to apply this transformation is a vulnerability (encounter cross-site scripting), applying information technology also many times results in garbling of these characters. For instance, the quotation mark
"becomes",","and and then on. - Bush hid the facts
References [edit]
- ^ a b Male monarch, Ritchie (2012). "Will unicode shortly be the universal code? [The Data]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (7): 60. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
- ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "roll -v linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved 5 October 2018.
- ^ "Guidelines for extended attributes". 2013-05-17. Retrieved 2015-02-fifteen .
- ^ "Unicode mailinglist on the Eudora email customer". 2001-05-13. Retrieved 2014-eleven-01 .
- ^ "sms-scam". June 18, 2014. Retrieved June nineteen, 2014.
- ^ p. 141, Command + Alt + Delete: A Dictionary of Cyberslang, Jonathon Keats, Globe Pequot, 2007, ISBN 1-59921-039-viii.
- ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
- ^ "Declaring character encodings in HTML".
- ^ "Red china GBK (XGB)". Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2002-10-01. Conversion map between Code page 936 and Unicode. Need manually selecting GB18030 or GBK in browser to view information technology correctly.
- ^ Cohen, Noam (June 25, 2007). "Some Errors Defy Fixes: A Typo in Wikipedia'due south Logo Fractures the Sanskrit". The New York Times . Retrieved July 17, 2009.
- ^ https://marathi.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 earth". The Nippon Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved 24 December 2019.
Oct. 1 is "U-Day", when Myanmar officially will adopt the new organization.... 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 December 2019.
With the release of Windows XP service pack 2, complex scripts were supported, which made it possible for Windows to render a Unicode-compliant Burmese font such as Myanmar1 (released in 2005). ... Myazedi, Scrap, and after Zawgyi, circumscribed the rendering problem by calculation extra code points that were reserved for Myanmar'due south ethnic languages. Not just does the re-mapping prevent future indigenous language support, it also results in a typing system that tin can be confusing and inefficient, even for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the 2 near pop smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated only by capturing the largest market share, which means they support Zawgyi out of the box.
- ^ a b Sin, Thant (7 September 2019). "Unified under one font system as Myanmar prepares to migrate from Zawgyi to Unicode". Rising Voices . Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
Standard Myanmar Unicode fonts were never mainstreamed unlike the private and partially Unicode compliant Zawgyi font. ... Unicode will better natural linguistic communication processing
- ^ "Why Unicode is Needed". Google Code: Zawgyi Project . Retrieved 31 October 2013.
- ^ "Myanmar Scripts and Languages". Oft Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
"UTF-eight" technically does not use to advertizement hoc font encodings such as Zawgyi.
- ^ LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019). "Integrating autoconversion: Facebook's path from Zawgyi to Unicode - Facebook Technology". Facebook Technology. Facebook. Retrieved 25 Dec 2019.
Information technology makes advice on digital platforms hard, equally content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. ... In order to better reach their audiences, content producers in Myanmar oft post in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a unmarried post, non to mention English or other languages.
- ^ Saw Yi Nanda (21 November 2019). "Myanmar switch to Unicode to accept two years: app developer". The Myanmar Times . Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
External links [edit]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake
0 Response to "Mã¡âºâ·t Nã¡âºâ¡ Ä‘ã¡âºâ¥t Sãƒâ©t the Body Shop Review"
Post a Comment