What Is the Solution to the Equation Mc011-1.jpg? D = –4 and D = 2 D = –2 and D = 4 D = 1 D = 2
Mojibake ( 文字化け ; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the issue of text being decoded using an unintended character encoding.[one] The event is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, often from a different writing system.
This display may include the generic replacement character ("�") in places where the binary representation is considered invalid. A replacement can likewise involve multiple consecutive symbols, as viewed in one encoding, when the aforementioned 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 utilize 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 different outcome that is non to be confused with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the code signal displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement character. Importantly, these replacements are valid and are the result of correct error handling past the software.
Etymology [edit]
Mojibake ways "graphic symbol 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 by manipulating the information itself, or just relabeling it.
Mojibake is oftentimes seen with text data that have been tagged with a incorrect encoding; information technology may not even exist tagged at all, but moved between computers with dissimilar default encodings. A major source of problem 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 human languages. Whereas Linux distributions mostly switched to UTF-8 in 2004,[2] Microsoft Windows generally uses UTF-16, and sometimes uses 8-fleck lawmaking pages for text files in unlike languages.[ dubious ]
For some writing systems, an instance being Japanese, several encodings have historically been employed, causing users to come across mojibake relatively oftentimes. As 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 aforementioned text stored every bit UTF-eight 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 equally "æ–‡å—化ã'" in software that assumes text to be in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-1 encodings, usually labelled Western, or (for example) as "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted as being in a GBK (Mainland Cathay) locale.
| Original text | 文 | 字 | 化 | け | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw bytes of EUC-JP encoding | CA | B8 | BB | FA | B2 | BD | A4 | B1 |
| Bytes interpreted as Shift-JIS encoding | ﾊ | ｸ | ｻ | 郾 | ｽ | ､ | ｱ | |
| Bytes interpreted equally ISO-8859-i encoding | Ê | ¸ | » | ú | ² | ½ | ¤ | ± |
| Bytes interpreted every bit GBK encoding | 矢 | 机 | 步 | け | ||||
Underspecification [edit]
If the encoding is non specified, it is up to the software to decide it by other ways. Depending on the blazon 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 past locale setting, which depends on the user'southward language, brand of operating system and possibly other conditions. Therefore, the assumed encoding is systematically wrong for files that come from a computer with a different setting, or even from a differently localized software within the same system. For Unicode, one solution is to apply a byte order mark, but for source lawmaking and other machine readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Some other is storing the encoding every bit metadata in the file system. File systems that support extended file attributes can store this as user.charset.[iii] This also requires back up in software that wants to have advantage of it, but does not disturb other software.
While a few encodings are easy to find, in item UTF-8, there are many that are hard to distinguish (meet charset detection). A web browser may non be able to distinguish a page coded in EUC-JP and some other in Shift-JIS if the coding scheme is non assigned explicitly using HTTP headers sent along with the documents, or using the HTML certificate's meta tags that are used to substitute for missing HTTP headers if the server cannot be configured to send the proper HTTP headers; meet character encodings in HTML.
Mis-specification [edit]
Mojibake also 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 equally ISO-8859-1 that were in reality Windows-1252.[four] The Mac Os version of Eudora did not showroom this behaviour. Windows-1252 contains extra printable characters in the C1 range (the most frequently seen beingness curved quotation marks and extra dashes), that were non displayed properly in software complying with the ISO standard; this especially afflicted software running under other operating systems such as Unix.
Man ignorance [edit]
Of the encodings yet in employ, many are partially compatible with each other, with ASCII as the predominant common subset. This sets the stage for man ignorance:
- Compatibility tin can exist a deceptive property, as the common subset of characters is unaffected past a mixup of two encodings (see Problems in different writing systems).
- People think they are using ASCII, and tend to characterization whatever superset of ASCII they actually apply as "ASCII". Perhaps for simplification, but even in academic literature, the word "ASCII" tin can exist found used as an example of something not uniform with Unicode, where evidently "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-8.[1] Note that UTF-eight is backwards compatible with ASCII.
Overspecification [edit]
When in that location are layers of protocols, each trying to specify the encoding based on unlike data, the least sure data may be misleading to the recipient. For example, consider a web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The character prepare may be communicated to the client in any number of 3 ways:
- in the HTTP header. This information can be based on server configuration (for example, when serving a file off disk) or controlled by the application 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 gild mark. This is the encoding that the author'due south editor actually saved it in. Unless an accidental encoding conversion has happened (past opening it in one encoding and saving it in some other), this will exist right. It is, however, only bachelor in Unicode encodings such as UTF-8 or UTF-16.
Lack of hardware or software back up [edit]
Much older hardware is typically designed to support simply one character set and the character set typically cannot be altered. The graphic symbol tabular array contained inside the display firmware will exist localized to have characters for the country the device is to be sold in, and typically the table differs from country to country. As such, these systems volition potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a system from a different country. Likewise, many early operating systems do non support multiple encoding formats and thus will end up displaying mojibake if made to brandish non-standard text—early versions of Microsoft Windows and Palm Os for example, are localized on a per-state basis and volition simply support encoding standards relevant to the country the localized version will exist sold in, and volition brandish 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 reach a greater degree of interoperability because of its widespread use and backward compatibility with U.s.-ASCII. UTF-eight also has the power to exist straight recognised by a simple algorithm, and so that well written software should be able to avert mixing UTF-viii upwardly with other encodings.
The difficulty of resolving an instance of mojibake varies depending on the application within which it occurs and the causes of it. Two of the nearly common 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 permit a user to change their rendering engine'due south encoding setting on the fly, while word processors allow the user to select the advisable encoding when opening a file. It may take some trial and error for users to find the right encoding.
The problem gets more complicated when information technology occurs in an application that commonly does not support a wide range of character encoding, such as in a not-Unicode computer game. In this case, the user must change the operating organization'due south encoding settings to friction match that of the game. Notwithstanding, irresolute the arrangement-wide encoding settings can also cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or later, a user also has the pick to employ Microsoft AppLocale, an awarding that allows the changing of per-application locale settings. Nonetheless, changing the operating system encoding settings is non possible on before operating systems such every bit Windows 98; to resolve this issue on earlier operating systems, a user would have to utilize third political party font rendering applications.
Bug in unlike 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 hold with ASCII on the encoding of the English alphabet. For example, the pound sign "£" will announced as "£" if it was encoded by the sender equally UTF-8 but interpreted by the recipient as CP1252 or ISO 8859-ane. If iterated using CP1252, this can lead to "£", "£", "ÃÆ'‚£", etc.
Some computers did, in older eras, accept vendor-specific encodings which acquired mismatch too for English language text. Commodore make 8-scrap computers used PETSCII encoding, particularly 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 non friction match ASCII at all.
Other Western European languages [edit]
The alphabets of the North Germanic languages, Catalan, Finnish, German, French, Portuguese and Castilian are all extensions of the Latin alphabet. The additional 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 language
- 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 Castilian
- 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-8859-1 character set (as well known every bit Latin 1 or Western) has been in apply. Even so, ISO-8859-1 has been obsoleted by two competing standards, the backward uniform Windows-1252, and the slightly altered ISO-8859-xv. Both add the Euro sign € and the French œ, only otherwise any confusion of these three character sets does not create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is always prophylactic to interpret ISO-8859-i equally Windows-1252, and adequately safe to translate it as ISO-8859-xv, in particular with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). Nevertheless, with the advent of UTF-8, mojibake has become more mutual in sure scenarios, east.one thousand. exchange of text files between UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-8's incompatibility with Latin-one and Windows-1252. But UTF-eight has the ability to exist directly recognised past a simple algorithm, and then that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-8 upwards with other encodings, so this was most common when many had software not supporting UTF-eight. Most of these languages were supported by MS-DOS default CP437 and other motorcar default encodings, except ASCII, so problems when ownership an operating organization version were less common. Windows and MS-DOS are not compatible however.
In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and German, vowels are rarely repeated, and information technology is usually obvious when ane character gets corrupted, e.g. the 2nd letter of the alphabet in "kärlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This way, fifty-fifty though the reader has to approximate between å, ä and ö, almost all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other manus, does feature repeating vowels in words like hääyö ("wedding dark") which tin sometimes render text very hard to read (e.g. hääyö appears as "hääyö"). Icelandic and Faroese have x and eight possibly misreckoning characters, respectively, which thus can go far more difficult to guess corrupted characters; Icelandic words similar þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") become nearly entirely unintelligible when rendered as "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 computer, either by omitting the problematic diacritics, or past 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 not available. The latter exercise 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 advice with other parts of the earth. As an instance, the Norwegian football game player Ole Gunnar Solskjær had his proper name spelled "SOLSKJAER" on his back when he played for Manchester United.
An artifact of UTF-8 misinterpreted every bit ISO-8859-1, "Ring meg nÃ¥" (" Ring one thousand thousand nå "), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Norway in June 2014.[5]
| Swedish case: | Smörgås (open sandwich) | |
|---|---|---|
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Outcome |
| MS-DOS 437 | ISO 8859-ane | Sm"rg†due south |
| ISO 8859-ane | Mac Roman | SmˆrgÂs |
| UTF-8 | ISO 8859-i | Smörgådue south |
| UTF-8 | Mac Roman | Smörgås |
Central and Eastern European [edit]
Users of Fundamental and Eastern European languages can also be affected. Because most computers were not connected to any network during the mid- to late-1980s, in that location were unlike character encodings for every language with diacritical characters (see ISO/IEC 8859 and KOI-viii), often 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-1 character gear up), plus the two characters ő and ű, which are not in Latin-1. These 2 characters can be correctly encoded in Latin-2, Windows-1250 and Unicode. Before Unicode became mutual in e-mail clients, e-mails containing Hungarian text oftentimes had the letters ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the point of unrecognizability. It is common to answer to an email rendered unreadable (see examples below) by character mangling (referred to as "betűszemét", meaning "letter garbage") with the phrase "Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép", a nonsense phrase (literally "Alluvion-resistant mirror-drilling motorcar") containing all absolute characters used in Hungarian.
Examples [edit]
| Source encoding | Target encoding | Result | Occurrence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hungarian example | ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép | Characters in crimson are incorrect and do non 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 by the Central European CP 852 encoding; however, the operating system, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Please note that small-instance letters are mainly correct, exception with ő (ï) and ű (√). Ü/ü is correct because 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 and then 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 Key-European one. Only ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are incorrect, just the text is completely readable. This is the nearly common error nowadays; due to ignorance, information technology occurs oftentimes on webpages or even in printed media. |
| CP 852 | Windows-1250 | µRVÖZTëRŠ TšOne thousand™RFéRŕG P rvˇztűr‹ t k"rfŁr˘m‚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▄KÍRF┌RËG╔P ßrvÝztűr§ tŘk÷rf˙rˇgÚp | Central European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The use of ű is correct. |
| Quoted-printable | 7-bit ASCII | =C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5 T=DCOne thousand=D6RF=DAR=D3G=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F3g=E9p | Mainly caused by wrongly configured postal service servers but may occur in SMS messages on some jail cell-phones also. |
| UTF-8 | Windows-1252 | ÃRVÃZTÅ°RÅ TÃœMÖRFÚRÃ"GÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tükörfúrógép | Mainly caused by wrongly configured web services or webmail clients, which were not tested for international usage (as the trouble remains concealed for English texts). In this instance the bodily (often generated) content is in UTF-8; however, it is not configured in the HTML headers, then the rendering engine displays information technology with the default Western encoding. |
Polish [edit]
Prior to the creation of ISO 8859-2 in 1987, users of diverse computing platforms used their own grapheme 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 Polish characters and simply 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 estimator sellers had placed them.
The situation began to amend when, after force per unit area from academic and user groups, ISO 8859-2 succeeded as the "Internet standard" with limited back up of the ascendant vendors' software (today largely replaced by Unicode). With the numerous problems caused past the variety of encodings, fifty-fifty today some users tend to refer to Polish diacritical characters as krzaczki ([kshach-kih], lit. "piffling 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.[vi] 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-only seven-scrap KOI7, based on ASCII simply with Latin and some other characters replaced with Cyrillic messages. So came 8-chip KOI8 encoding that is an ASCII extension which encodes Cyrillic letters only with high-bit set octets corresponding to 7-bit codes from KOI7. It is for this reason that KOI8 text, fifty-fifty Russian, remains partially readable after stripping the eighth bit, which was considered every bit a major reward in the age of 8BITMIME-unaware email systems. For example, words " Школа русского языка " shkola russkogo yazyka , encoded in KOI8 and and so passed through the high fleck stripping process, stop upwardly rendered as "[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 Belarusian also as Russian/Bulgarian in MS-DOS. For Microsoft Windows, Lawmaking 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 globe'southward languages, including all Cyrillic characters.
Earlier Unicode, it was necessary to friction match text encoding with a font using the same encoding system. Failure to do this produced unreadable gibberish whose specific advent varied depending on the exact 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 generally of capital letters (KOI8 and codepage 1251 share the same ASCII region, simply KOI8 has capital letter 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 years of the Russian sector of the Www, both KOI8 and codepage 1251 were common. As of 2017, one can still encounter HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, as well as Unicode. (An estimated 1.7% of all 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,[8] this is sometimes neglected, forcing the user to switch encodings in the browser manually.
In Bulgarian, mojibake is ofttimes called majmunica ( маймуница ), pregnant "monkey's [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is called đubre ( ђубре ), meaning "trash". Different the former USSR, S Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Folio 1251 was the dominant Cyrillic encoding in that location before Unicode. Therefore, these languages experienced fewer encoding incompatibility troubles than Russian. In the 1980s, Bulgarian computers used their ain MIK encoding, which is superficially similar to (although incompatible with) CP866.
| Russian instance: | Кракозябры ( krakozyabry , garbage characters) | |
|---|---|---|
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Effect |
| 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-Croatian 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, generally in foreign names, also). All of these letters are defined in Latin-two and Windows-1250, while only some (š, Š, ž, Ž, Đ) exist in the usual OS-default Windows-1252, and are in that location because of some other languages.
Although Mojibake can occur with any of these characters, the messages that are not included in Windows-1252 are much more prone to errors. Thus, fifty-fifty nowadays, "šđčćž ŠĐČĆŽ" is oftentimes displayed as "šðèæž ŠÐÈÆŽ", although ð, è, æ, È, Æ are never used in Slavic languages.
When confined to basic ASCII (about user names, for example), common replacements are: š→s, đ→dj, č→c, ć→c, ž→z (majuscule forms analogously, with Đ→Dj or Đ→DJ depending on discussion example). All of these replacements introduce ambiguities, then reconstructing the original from such a form is usually done manually if required.
The Windows-1252 encoding is of import because the English versions of the Windows operating organisation are most widespread, non localized ones.[ citation needed ] The reasons for this include a relatively modest and fragmented market, increasing the price of loftier quality localization, a high caste of software piracy (in plough 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 issues. There are many different localizations, using dissimilar standards and of different quality. There are no mutual translations for the vast amount of computer terminology originating in English. In the cease, people use adopted English words ("kompjuter" for "estimator", "kompajlirati" for "compile," etc.), and if they are unaccustomed to the translated terms may not understand what some choice in a menu is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who understand English, too as those who are accepted to English terminology (who are near, because English terminology is too more often than not taught in schools because of these bug) regularly choose the original English 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 language Windows allow the code page to exist changed (older versions require special English language versions with this support), just this setting can exist and often was incorrectly set. For example, Windows 98 and Windows Me can be prepare to most not-right-to-left unmarried-byte code pages including 1250, but merely at install time.
Caucasian languages [edit]
The writing systems of sure languages of the Caucasus region, including the scripts of Georgian and Armenian, may produce mojibake. This problem is particularly acute in the instance of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a set of obsolete grapheme encodings for the Armenian alphabet which accept been superseded by Unicode standards. ArmSCII is non widely used because of a lack of support in the computer industry. For example, Microsoft Windows does non support it.
Asian encodings [edit]
Some other blazon of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such as i of the encodings for East Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more one (typically two) characters are corrupted at once, due east.thou. "k舐lek" ( kärlek ) in Swedish, where " är " is parsed as "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 curt words starting with å, ä or ö such every bit "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since two messages 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 pattern 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 figurer try to encode diacritic character divers in Windows-1258, TCVN3 or VNI to UTF-viii. Chữ ma was common in Vietnam when user was using Windows XP estimator or using cheap mobile phone.
| Example: | Trăm năm trong cõi người ta (Truyện Kiều, Nguyễn Du) | |
|---|---|---|
| Original encoding | Target encoding | Result |
| Windows-1258 | UTF-8 | Trăthousand northwardăm trong cõi ngÆ°á»i ta |
| TCVN3 | UTF-8 | Tr¨m n¨thou trong câi ngêi ta |
| VNI (Windows) | UTF-8 | Traêk naêchiliad trong coõi ngöôøi ta |
Japanese [edit]
In Japanese, the same phenomenon is, every bit mentioned, called mojibake ( 文字化け ). It is a particular trouble in Nippon due to the numerous different encodings that exist for Japanese text. Aslope Unicode encodings like UTF-8 and UTF-16, at that place are other standard encodings, such every bit Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, as well as beingness encountered past Japanese users, is likewise often encountered past non-Japanese when attempting to run software written for the Japanese market place.
Chinese [edit]
In Chinese, the aforementioned phenomenon is called Luàn mǎ (Pinyin, Simplified Chinese 乱码 , Traditional Chinese 亂碼 , meaning 'chaotic lawmaking'), and can occur when computerised text is encoded in one Chinese character encoding simply is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, information technology is oft possible to fix the upshot past switching the grapheme encoding without loss of information. The state of affairs is complicated considering of the existence of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the nearly common ones being: Unicode, Big5, and Guobiao (with several backward compatible versions), and the possibility of Chinese characters beingness encoded using Japanese encoding.
Information technology is piece of cake 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 significant. The ruby graphic symbol 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 as characters with the radical 亻, while kanji are other characters. Most of them are extremely uncommon and not in practical utilise in mod Chinese. |
| EUC-KR | GB | 叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨 | 디제이맥스 테크니카 | Random mutual Simplified Chinese characters which in almost cases make no sense. Hands identifiable because of spaces between every several characters. |
An additional problem is acquired when encodings are missing characters, which is common with rare or antiquated characters that are still used in personal or identify 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 )'southward "堃" and vocalizer 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 ii existing, like characters; using a picture of the personality; or but substituting a homophone for the rare character in the hope that the reader would exist able to make the right inference.
Indic text [edit]
A similar effect can occur in Brahmic or Indic scripts of Southern asia, used in such Indo-Aryan or Indic languages as Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu), Bengali, Punjabi, Marathi, and others, even if the character set employed is properly recognized by the application. This is because, in many Indic scripts, the rules past which individual letter symbols combine to create symbols for syllables may not be properly understood by a computer missing the advisable software, even if the glyphs for the individual letter forms are available.
Ane example of this is the quondam Wikipedia logo, which attempts to prove the character analogous to "wi" (the first syllable of "Wikipedia") on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle piece meant to bear the Devanagari character for "wi" instead used to display the "wa" character followed by an unpaired "i" modifier vowel, hands recognizable as mojibake generated by a computer not configured to display Indic text.[10] The logo as redesigned as of May 2010[ref] has fixed these errors.
The idea of Apparently Text requires the operating system to provide a font to brandish Unicode codes. This font is different from Os to Bone for Singhala and it 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 usually goes on top of a plain letter. Even so, it is wrong to proceed peak 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 summit of these letters. By contrast, for similar sounds in modernistic languages which result from their specific rules, it is not put on tiptop, such as the word करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stalk form of the common discussion करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marä thi language.[11] But it happens in well-nigh operating systems. This appears to be a fault of internal programming of the fonts. In Mac Bone and iOS, the muurdhaja 50 (dark l) and 'u' combination and its long form both yield wrong shapes.[ citation needed ]
Some Indic and Indic-derived scripts, about notably Lao, were non officially supported by Windows XP until the release of Vista.[12] However, various sites take made complimentary-to-download fonts.
Burmese [edit]
Due to Western sanctions[13] and the late arrival of Burmese language support in computers,[xiv] [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 but was in fact merely partially Unicode compliant.[15] In the Zawgyi font, some codepoints for Burmese script were implemented as specified in Unicode, simply others were not.[16] The Unicode Consortium refers to this every bit ad hoc font encodings.[17] With the advent of mobile phones, mobile vendors such as Samsung and Huawei simply replaced the Unicode compliant system fonts with Zawgyi versions.[14]
Due to these ad hoc encodings, communications between users of Zawgyi and Unicode would render every bit garbled text. To become effectually this event, content producers would brand posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.[18] Myanmar government has designated 1 Oct 2019 every bit "U-Day" to officially switch to Unicode.[13] The full transition is estimated to take 2 years.[nineteen]
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 Democratic Democracy of the Congo, just these are not generally supported. Diverse other writing systems native to West Africa present similar problems, such every bit the Northward'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Republic of liberia.
Arabic [edit]
Some other afflicted language is Arabic (see below). The text becomes unreadable when the encodings do not lucifer.
Examples [edit]
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Arabic case: |  (Universal Declaration of Man 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-five | 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 do non have UTF-8 as browser setting, because UTF-8 is hands recognisable, and so if a browser supports UTF-viii it should recognise it automatically, and not endeavour to interpret something else as UTF-8.
See also [edit]
- Code point
- Replacement grapheme
- Substitute graphic symbol
- Newline – The conventions for representing the line interruption differ between Windows and Unix systems. Though virtually software supports both conventions (which is trivial), software that must preserve or display the difference (eastward.g. version command systems and data comparing tools) tin can go substantially more difficult to use if not adhering to one convention.
- Byte social club marking – The most in-band fashion to shop the encoding together with the data – prepend information technology. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, merely will by blueprint be perceived as "garbage characters" to incompliant software (including many interpreters).
- HTML entities – An encoding of special characters in HTML, by and large optional, simply required for certain characters to escape estimation as markup.
While failure to apply this transformation is a vulnerability (see cross-site scripting), applying it as well many times results in garbling of these characters. For instance, the quotation mark
"becomes",","and so on. - Bush hid the facts
References [edit]
- ^ a b King, Ritchie (2012). "Volition unicode soon be the universal code? [The Data]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (7): threescore. doi:ten.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
- ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "curl -5 linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved 5 October 2018.
- ^ "Guidelines for extended attributes". 2013-05-17. Retrieved 2015-02-15 .
- ^ "Unicode mailinglist on the Eudora electronic mail client". 2001-05-13. Retrieved 2014-11-01 .
- ^ "sms-scam". June 18, 2014. Retrieved June xix, 2014.
- ^ p. 141, Control + Alt + Delete: A Dictionary of Cyberslang, Jonathon Keats, World Pequot, 2007, ISBN 1-59921-039-8.
- ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
- ^ "Declaring character encodings in HTML".
- ^ "PRC GBK (XGB)". Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2002-x-01. Conversion map between Code folio 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's 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 world". The Nihon Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
Oct. 1 is "U-Solar day", when Myanmar officially volition prefer 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". Borderland Myanmar . Retrieved 24 December 2019.
With the release of Windows XP service pack 2, circuitous scripts were supported, which made information technology 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's ethnic languages. Not only does the re-mapping foreclose futurity ethnic language support, it as well results in a typing arrangement that can be confusing and inefficient, even for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the two nearly pop smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated but past capturing the largest market place share, which means they support Zawgyi out of the box.
- ^ a b Sin, Thant (7 September 2019). "Unified under ane 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 improve natural language processing
- ^ "Why Unicode is Needed". Google Lawmaking: Zawgyi Projection . Retrieved 31 October 2013.
- ^ "Myanmar Scripts and Languages". Oftentimes Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 24 December 2019.
"UTF-viii" technically does non employ to advertisement hoc font encodings such as Zawgyi.
- ^ LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019). "Integrating autoconversion: Facebook'due south path from Zawgyi to Unicode - Facebook Engineering science". Facebook Engineering science. Facebook. Retrieved 25 December 2019.
It makes communication on digital platforms difficult, equally content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. ... In order to better accomplish their audiences, content producers in Myanmar often post 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 accept two years: app developer". The Myanmar Times . Retrieved 24 December 2019.
External links [edit]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake
0 Response to "What Is the Solution to the Equation Mc011-1.jpg? D = –4 and D = 2 D = –2 and D = 4 D = 1 D = 2"
Post a Comment