ã€âã§â„¢âºã¥â£â²ã¥â»â¶ã¦å“å¸ã£â‚¬â€˜ugokku 3: a Busty Gyal Who Travels in Search of Ballz

Garbled text as a result of wrong character encoding

Mojibake (Japanese: 文字化け; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the effect of text being decoded using an unintended character encoding.^[1] The result 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 sequent symbols, equally 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 sixteen-chip encodings vs European 8-fleck encodings), or the use of variable length encodings (notably UTF-viii and UTF-16).

Failed rendering of glyphs due to either missing fonts or missing glyphs in a font is a different consequence that is not to be dislocated with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the code point displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement character. Importantly, these replacements are valid and are the result of correct error treatment by the software.

Etymology [edit]

Mojibake means "character transformation" in Japanese. The word is composed of 文字 (moji, IPA: [mod͡ʑi]), "graphic symbol" 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. Every bit mojibake is the case of non-compliance between these, it tin be achieved by manipulating the data itself, or only relabeling it.

Mojibake is frequently seen with text data that have been tagged with a wrong encoding; it may not even be tagged at all, merely moved between computers with different default encodings. A major source of trouble are advice 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 role due to differing deployments of Unicode among operating system families, and partly the legacy encodings' specializations for different writing systems of human being languages. Whereas Linux distributions generally switched to UTF-eight in 2004,^[2] Microsoft Windows generally uses UTF-16, and sometimes uses eight-bit lawmaking pages for text files in different languages.^{[ dubious – hash out ]}

For some writing systems, an case being Japanese, several encodings have historically been employed, causing users to see mojibake relatively ofttimes. As a Japanese instance, 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 same text stored equally 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 aforementioned UTF-eight text appears equally "文字化ã'" in software that assumes text to be in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-1 encodings, usually labelled Western, or (for example) equally "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted as being in a GBK (Mainland Communist china) locale.

Mojibake example

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 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 upwards 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 decumbent to mis-prediction in not-and then-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 causeless 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, 1 solution is to use a byte social club mark, but for source lawmaking and other machine readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Some other is storing the encoding equally metadata in the file system. File systems that back up extended file attributes can shop this every bit user.charset.^[iii] This also requires back up in software that wants to take advantage of it, but does not disturb other software.

While a few encodings are like shooting fish in a barrel to detect, in particular UTF-8, there are many that are difficult to distinguish (see charset detection). A web browser may not exist 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'due south meta tags that are used to substitute for missing HTTP headers if the server cannot exist configured to ship the proper HTTP headers; see 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 instance, the Eudora email client for Windows was known to ship emails labelled as ISO-8859-1 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 most ofttimes seen being curved quotation marks and extra dashes), that were not displayed properly in software complying with the ISO standard; this peculiarly affected software running under other operating systems such as Unix.

Man ignorance [edit]

Of the encodings still in use, many are partially compatible with each other, with ASCII as the predominant common subset. This sets the phase for homo ignorance:

• Compatibility can be a deceptive holding, as the mutual subset of characters is unaffected by a mixup of 2 encodings (see Problems in different writing systems).
• People call up they are using ASCII, and tend to label whatever superset of ASCII they actually utilise as "ASCII". Maybe for simplification, but even in academic literature, the word "ASCII" tin be found used as an example of something not compatible with Unicode, where plainly "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-8.^[1] Note that UTF-8 is backwards compatible with ASCII.

Overspecification [edit]

When at that place are layers of protocols, each trying to specify the encoding based on different information, the least sure information may be misleading to the recipient. For instance, consider a web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The character gear up may be communicated to the client in whatsoever number of 3 ways:

• in the HTTP header. This information can be based on server configuration (for instance, when serving a file off deejay) or controlled past the application running on the server (for dynamic websites).
• in the file, as an HTML meta tag (http-equiv or charset) or the encoding aspect of an XML proclamation. This is the encoding that the author meant to save the detail file in.
• in the file, as a byte order marker. This is the encoding that the writer's editor actually saved it in. Unless an accidental encoding conversion has happened (by opening information technology in one encoding and saving it in another), this will be correct. Information technology is, however, but 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 but one character set and the character set typically cannot be contradistinct. The character table contained inside the brandish 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. Equally such, these systems will potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a system from a different land. Besides, 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-country basis and will only support encoding standards relevant to the country the localized version volition exist sold in, and volition 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-viii as a default encoding may achieve a greater caste of interoperability because of its widespread use and backward compatibility with U.s.-ASCII. UTF-eight also has the ability to exist directly recognised by a elementary algorithm, then that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-8 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 most mutual applications in which mojibake may occur are web browsers and word processors. Modern browsers and word processors often back up a wide array of graphic symbol encodings. Browsers often let a user to modify their rendering engine'due south encoding setting on the fly, while discussion processors allow the user to select the appropriate encoding when opening a file. Information technology may have some trial and mistake for users to detect the right encoding.

The trouble gets more complicated when it occurs in an application that ordinarily does non back up a broad range of grapheme encoding, such every bit in a not-Unicode reckoner game. In this case, the user must alter the operating system's encoding settings to friction match that of the game. Yet, changing the system-wide encoding settings tin also cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or later, a user also has the option to use Microsoft AppLocale, an awarding that allows the changing of per-application locale settings. Even so, changing the operating system encoding settings is not possible on before operating systems such every bit Windows 98; to resolve this issue on earlier operating systems, a user would have to apply third party font rendering applications.

Problems in dissimilar writing systems [edit]

English language [edit]

Mojibake in English texts generally occurs in punctuation, such as em dashes (—), en dashes (–), and curly quotes (",",','), merely rarely in graphic symbol text, since most encodings concur with ASCII on the encoding of the English alphabet. For example, the pound sign "£" will appear as "£" if it was encoded past the sender as UTF-8 simply interpreted by the recipient as CP1252 or ISO 8859-ane. If iterated using CP1252, this tin can lead to "£", "£", "ÃÆ'‚£", etc.

Some computers did, in older eras, have vendor-specific encodings which caused mismatch also for English language text. Commodore brand viii-scrap computers used PETSCII encoding, particularly notable for inverting the upper and lower instance compared to standard ASCII. PETSCII printers worked fine on other computers of the era, merely flipped the case of all messages. IBM mainframes utilise the EBCDIC encoding which does not 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 boosted characters are typically the ones that go corrupted, making texts simply 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 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 gaelic
• à, è, ì, ò, ù in Scottish Gaelic
• £ in British English

… and their capital counterparts, if applicable.

These are languages for which the ISO-8859-1 character set (also known as Latin ane or Western) has been in use. Notwithstanding, ISO-8859-1 has been obsoleted by two competing standards, the backward compatible Windows-1252, and the slightly contradistinct ISO-8859-15. Both add the Euro sign € and the French œ, merely otherwise whatever defoliation of these three character sets does not create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is e'er safe to translate ISO-8859-1 as Windows-1252, and fairly safe to translate it every bit ISO-8859-15, in item with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). Still, with the advent of UTF-eight, mojibake has get more common in sure scenarios, due east.g. commutation of text files between UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-viii's incompatibility with Latin-1 and Windows-1252. But UTF-viii has the power to be directly recognised past a elementary algorithm, and so that well written software should be able to avert mixing UTF-8 up with other encodings, so this was virtually 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 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 2d letter in "kÃ⁠¤rlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This fashion, 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 ("hymeneals night") which can sometimes render text very hard to read (e.g. hääyö appears as "hÃ⁠¤Ã⁠¤yÃ⁠¶"). Icelandic and Faroese have x and 8 possibly confounding characters, respectively, which thus tin can brand it more than hard to guess corrupted characters; Icelandic words like þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") become nigh entirely unintelligible when rendered as "þjóðlöð".

In German, Buchstabensalat ("letter salad") is a common term for this phenomenon, and in Spanish, 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 author might write "ueber" instead of "über", which is standard practice in High german when umlauts are not available. The latter practice seems to exist better tolerated in the German linguistic communication sphere than in the Nordic countries. For example, in Norwegian, digraphs are associated with archaic Danish, and may exist used jokingly. However, digraphs are useful in advice with other parts of the globe. As an example, the Norwegian football player Ole Gunnar Solskjær had his name 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 meg nå "), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Norway in June 2014.^[v]

Examples

Swedish example:		Smörgås (open sandwich)
File encoding	Setting in browser	Result
MS-DOS 437	ISO 8859-ane	Sm"rg†s
ISO 8859-ane	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 also be affected. Because well-nigh computers were not connected to any network during the mid- to late-1980s, there were different character encodings for every language with diacritical characters (meet ISO/IEC 8859 and KOI-8), often also varying past operating system.

Hungarian [edit]

Hungarian is another affected language, which uses the 26 basic English language characters, plus the accented forms á, é, í, ó, ú, ö, ü (all present in the Latin-1 graphic symbol set), plus the 2 characters ő and ű, which are not in Latin-1. These two characters can be correctly encoded in Latin-two, Windows-1250 and Unicode. Earlier Unicode became common in e-mail clients, e-mails containing Hungarian text often had the messages ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the point of unrecognizability. Information technology is common to respond to an e-mail rendered unreadable (see examples beneath) by character mangling (referred to as "betűszemét", meaning "letter 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	Result	Occurrence
Hungarian instance		ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép	Characters in red are incorrect and exercise 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 past the Central European CP 852 encoding; withal, the operating system, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Please annotation that small-case 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 so that the text remains adequately well-readable even if the brandish 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 1. Only ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are wrong, only the text is completely readable. This is the almost common error nowadays; 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˘grand‚p	Central European Windows encoding is used instead of DOS encoding. The utilize of ű is right.
Windows-1250	CP 852	┴RV═ZT█RŇ T▄KÍRF┌RËG╔P ßrvÝztűr§ tŘthou÷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=DCK=D6RF=DAR=D3Chiliad=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F3g=E9p	Mainly caused by wrongly configured mail servers merely may occur in SMS messages on some cell-phones also.
UTF-8	Windows-1252	ÁRVÍZTÅ°RŐ TÃœKÖRFÚRÃ"GÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tügrandörfúrógrandép	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 example the actual (ofttimes 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.

Smooth [edit]

Prior to the creation of ISO 8859-2 in 1987, users of various computing platforms used their own graphic symbol 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 but reprogrammed the EPROMs of the video cards (typically CGA, EGA, or Hercules) to provide hardware lawmaking pages with the needed glyphs for Smoothen—arbitrarily located without reference to where other computer sellers had placed them.

The situation began to better when, afterward force per unit area from academic and user groups, ISO 8859-ii succeeded as the "Cyberspace standard" with express support of the ascendant vendors' software (today largely replaced by Unicode). With the numerous issues caused by the variety of encodings, even today some users tend to refer to Polish diacritical characters equally 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.^{[half dozen]} The Soviet Matrimony and early Russian federation developed KOI encodings ( Kod Obmena Informatsiey , Код Обмена Информацией , which translates to "Code for Information Exchange"). This began with Cyrillic-but 7-bit KOI7, based on ASCII but with Latin and some other characters replaced with Cyrillic letters. And so came viii-bit KOI8 encoding that is an ASCII extension which encodes Cyrillic letters only with loftier-bit set octets corresponding to 7-scrap codes from KOI7. It is for this reason that KOI8 text, even Russian, remains partially readable later stripping the eighth bit, which was considered as a major advantage in the age of 8BITMIME-unaware email systems. For example, words " Школа русского языка " shkola russkogo yazyka , encoded in KOI8 and so passed through the loftier bit stripping process, end up rendered every bit "[KOLA RUSSKOGO qZYKA". Eventually KOI8 gained different flavors for Russian and Bulgarian (KOI8-R), Ukrainian (KOI8-U), Belorussian (KOI8-RU) and fifty-fifty Tajik (KOI8-T).

Meanwhile, in the West, Code folio 866 supported Ukrainian and Belorussian as well as Russian/Bulgarian in MS-DOS. For Microsoft Windows, Lawmaking Page 1251 added support for Serbian and other Slavic variants of Cyrillic.

Virtually recently, the Unicode encoding includes code points for practically all the characters of all the earth's languages, including all Cyrillic characters.

Earlier Unicode, it was necessary to match text encoding with a font using the aforementioned encoding organization. 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 nearly 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 same ASCII region, just KOI8 has uppercase messages 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. As of 2017, 1 tin can notwithstanding come across HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, also as Unicode. (An estimated ane.7% of all spider web pages worldwide – all languages included – are encoded in codepage 1251.^[7]) 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 ), meaning "monkey's [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is called đubre ( ђубре ), meaning "trash". Unlike the former USSR, South Slavs never used something similar KOI8, and Code Folio 1251 was the dominant Cyrillic encoding there 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.

Case

Russian instance:		Кракозябры ( krakozyabry , garbage characters)
File encoding	Setting in browser	Event
MS-DOS 855	ISO 8859-1	Æá ÆÖóÞ¢áñ
KOI8-R	ISO 8859-1	ëÒÁËÏÚÑÂÒÙ
UTF-8	KOI8-R	п я─п╟п╨п╬п╥я▐п╠я─я▀

Yugoslav languages [edit]

Croatian, Bosnian, Serbian (the seceding varieties of Serbo-Croatian language) and Slovenian add to the basic Latin alphabet the letters š, đ, č, ć, ž, and their upper-case letter counterparts Š, Đ, Č, Ć, Ž (simply č/Č, š/Š and ž/Ž in Slovenian; officially, although others are used when needed, more often than not in foreign names, as well). All of these letters are divers in Latin-2 and Windows-1250, while only some (š, Š, ž, Ž, Đ) be in the usual Bone-default Windows-1252, and are in that location considering of some other languages.

Although Mojibake can occur with any of these characters, the letters that are not included in Windows-1252 are much more prone to errors. Thus, even 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 (most user names, for instance), 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 class is normally washed manually if required.

The Windows-1252 encoding is of import because the English language versions of the Windows operating system are most widespread, not localized ones.^{[ citation needed ]} The reasons for this include a relatively small and fragmented marketplace, increasing the price of high quality localization, a high degree of software piracy (in turn 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 bulldoze to differentiate Croatian from Serbian, Bosnian from Croatian and Serbian, and now even Montenegrin from the other three creates many problems. In that location are many unlike localizations, using different standards and of different quality. There are no mutual translations for the vast amount of figurer terminology originating in English. In the end, people use adopted English language words ("kompjuter" for "computer", "kompajlirati" for "compile," etc.), and if they are unaccustomed to the translated terms may not understand what some option in a bill of fare is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who sympathise English, as well as those who are accustomed to English terminology (who are almost, considering English terminology is also mostly taught in schools considering of these problems) regularly choose the original English versions of non-specialist software.

When Cyrillic script is used (for Macedonian and partially Serbian), the problem is like to other Cyrillic-based scripts.

Newer versions of English Windows allow the code folio to be changed (older versions require special English versions with this support), but this setting tin be and oft was incorrectly set. For example, Windows 98 and Windows Me tin can be gear up to most non-right-to-left single-byte code pages including 1250, only 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 astute in the case of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a set of obsolete grapheme 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 estimator industry. For instance, 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 as one of the encodings for E Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more than one (typically two) characters are corrupted at once, e.grand. "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 short words starting with å, ä or ö such as "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since two letters are combined, the mojibake too seems more than random (over 50 variants compared to the normal iii, not counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an entire text string which happens to include a pattern of particular word lengths, such every bit the sentence "Bush-league hid the facts", may be misinterpreted.

Vietnamese [edit]

In Vietnamese, the phenomenon is called chữ ma , loạn mã can occur when computer attempt to encode diacritic character defined in Windows-1258, TCVN3 or VNI to UTF-8. 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	Consequence
Windows-1258	UTF-8	Trăthousand northăg trong cõi người ta
TCVN3	UTF-8	Tr¨m n¨m trong câi ngêi ta
VNI (Windows)	UTF-8	Traêm naêm trong coõi ngöôøi ta

Japanese [edit]

In Japanese, the aforementioned phenomenon is, as mentioned, called mojibake ( 文字化け ). It is a particular problem in Japan due to the numerous different encodings that exist for Japanese text. Aslope Unicode encodings like UTF-8 and UTF-16, there are other standard encodings, such equally Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, equally well as being encountered by Japanese users, is besides frequently encountered by not-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 'cluttered code'), and can occur when computerised text is encoded in one Chinese character encoding but is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, information technology is often possible to fix the result by switching the character encoding without loss of data. The situation is complicated considering of the being of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the most common ones existence: Unicode, Big5, and Guobiao (with several astern compatible versions), and the possibility of Chinese characters being encoded using Japanese encoding.

It is easy to identify the original encoding when luanma occurs in Guobiao encodings:

Original encoding	Viewed every bit	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 pregnant. The cherry-red 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 as characters with the radical 亻, while kanji are other characters. Most of them are extremely uncommon and not in practical apply in modernistic Chinese.
EUC-KR	GB	叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨	디제이맥스 테크니카	Random mutual Simplified Chinese characters which in virtually cases make no sense. Easily identifiable considering of spaces betwixt every several characters.

An boosted problem is acquired when encodings are missing characters, which is common with rare or blowsy 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 )'south "煊", Yu Shyi-kun (simplified Chinese: 游锡堃; traditional Chinese: 游錫堃; pinyin: Yóu Xíkūn )'s "堃" and singer David Tao (Chinese: 陶喆; pinyin: Táo Zhé )'s "喆" missing in Big5, ex-Red china Premier Zhu Rongji (Chinese: 朱镕基; pinyin: Zhū Róngjī )'s "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 motion-picture show 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 issue tin occur in Brahmic or Indic scripts of Due south Asia, used in such Indo-Aryan or Indic languages as Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu), Bengali, Punjabi, Marathi, and others, even if the grapheme gear up employed is properly recognized by the application. This is because, in many Indic scripts, the rules by which private 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 instance of this is the old Wikipedia logo, which attempts to evidence the character analogous to "wi" (the get-go syllable of "Wikipedia") on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle piece meant to bear the Devanagari character for "wi" instead used to brandish the "wa" character followed by an unpaired "i" modifier vowel, easily recognizable as mojibake generated past a computer not configured to brandish Indic text.^[10] The logo as redesigned as of May 2010^[ref] has stock-still these errors.

The idea of Plain Text requires the operating system to provide a font to display Unicode codes. This font is different from OS to OS for Singhala and it makes orthographically wrong glyphs for some letters (syllables) beyond all operating systems. For case, the 'reph', the brusque form for 'r' is a diacritic that normally goes on top of a plain letter. However, it is wrong to get on top of some letters like 'ya' or 'la' in specific contexts. For Sanskritic words or names inherited past modern languages, such as कार्य, IAST: kārya, or आर्या, IAST: āryā, it is apt to put it on tiptop of these letters. By contrast, for similar sounds in mod languages which consequence from their specific rules, it is not put on tiptop, such as the word करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stem form of the common word करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marathi language.^[eleven] Merely it happens in most 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 grade both yield wrong shapes.^{[ citation 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^[thirteen] and the belatedly inflow of Burmese language support in computers,^{[14] [xv]} much of the early on Burmese localization was homegrown without international cooperation. The prevailing means of Burmese back up is via the Zawgyi font, a font that was created as a Unicode font but was in fact only partially Unicode compliant.^[15] In the Zawgyi font, some codepoints for Burmese script were implemented as specified in Unicode, but others were not.^[16] The Unicode Consortium refers to this equally ad hoc font encodings.^[17] With the advent of mobile phones, mobile vendors such equally Samsung and Huawei only replaced the Unicode compliant system fonts with Zawgyi versions.^[fourteen]

Due to these ad hoc encodings, communications between users of Zawgyi and Unicode would render as garbled text. To get around this issue, content producers would brand posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.^[18] Myanmar authorities has designated 1 October 2019 as "U-Mean solar day" to officially switch to Unicode.^[13] The full transition is estimated to take 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 as the Ge'ez script in 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 Republic of malaŵi and the Mandombe alphabet was created for the Autonomous Republic of the congo, but these are non by and large supported. Various other writing systems native to West Africa present like issues, such as the N'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Republic of guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Liberia.

Arabic [edit]

Another affected language is Arabic (run into below). The text becomes unreadable when the encodings exercise not match.

Examples [edit]

File encoding	Setting in browser	Event
Arabic example:		(Universal Declaration of Homo Rights)
Browser rendering:		الإعلان العالمى لحقوق الإنسان
UTF-8	Windows-1252	الإعلان العالمى لحقوق 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-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 article do not have UTF-8 as browser setting, because UTF-eight is easily recognisable, so if a browser supports UTF-eight it should recognise it automatically, and not try to interpret something else as UTF-viii.

See too [edit]

• Lawmaking bespeak
• Replacement character
• Substitute character
• Newline – The conventions for representing the line interruption differ between Windows and Unix systems. Though nearly software supports both conventions (which is fiddling), software that must preserve or display the difference (eastward.thou. version control systems and data comparison tools) tin get essentially more difficult to use if not adhering to i convention.
• Byte order mark – The most in-band way to store the encoding together with the data – prepend it. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, but will by design be perceived every bit "garbage characters" to incompliant software (including many interpreters).
• HTML entities – An encoding of special characters in HTML, mostly optional, simply required for sure characters to escape interpretation as markup.

  While failure to apply this transformation is a vulnerability (see cross-site scripting), applying it too many times results in garbling of these characters. For example, the quotation mark " becomes ", ", " and and so on.

• Bush hid the facts

References [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b} Male monarch, Ritchie (2012). "Volition unicode soon be the universal code? [The Information]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (vii): lx. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
2. ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "curlicue -v linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved five Oct 2018.
3. ^ "Guidelines for extended attributes". 2013-05-17. Retrieved 2015-02-fifteen .
4. ^ "Unicode mailinglist on the Eudora email client". 2001-05-thirteen. Retrieved 2014-11-01 .
5. ^ "sms-scam". June 18, 2014. Retrieved June 19, 2014.
6. ^ p. 141, Control + Alt + Delete: A Dictionary of Cyberslang, Jonathon Keats, Earth Pequot, 2007, ISBN one-59921-039-8.
7. ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
8. ^ "Declaring character encodings in HTML".
9. ^ "PRC GBK (XGB)". Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2002-10-01. Conversion map between Code folio 936 and Unicode. Need manually selecting GB18030 or GBK in browser to view it correctly.
10. ^ Cohen, Noam (June 25, 2007). "Some Errors Defy Fixes: A Typo in Wikipedia'southward Logo Fractures the Sanskrit". The New York Times . Retrieved July 17, 2009.
11. ^ https://marāthi.indiatyping.com/
12. ^ "Content Moved (Windows)". Msdn.microsoft.com. Retrieved 2014-02-05 .
13. ^ ^{a b} "Unicode in, Zawgyi out: Modernity finally catches up in Myanmar's digital globe". The Nippon Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved 24 December 2019. Oct. 1 is "U-Twenty-four hour period", when Myanmar officially will prefer the new system.... Microsoft and Apple tree helped other countries standardize years ago, simply Western sanctions meant Myanmar lost out.
14. ^ ^{a b} Hotchkiss, Griffin (March 23, 2016). "Battle of the fonts". Frontier Myanmar . Retrieved 24 December 2019. With the release of Windows XP service pack 2, complex scripts were supported, which made information technology possible for Windows to return a Unicode-compliant Burmese font such as Myanmar1 (released in 2005). ... Myazedi, Flake, 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 forestall future ethnic language support, it also results in a typing system that tin can be disruptive and inefficient, even for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the 2 almost popular smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated just by capturing the largest market share, which means they support Zawgyi out of the box.
15. ^ ^{a b} Sin, Thant (vii September 2019). "Unified nether i font system as Myanmar prepares to drift from Zawgyi to Unicode". Rising Voices . Retrieved 24 December 2019. Standard Myanmar Unicode fonts were never mainstreamed unlike the private and partially Unicode compliant Zawgyi font. ... Unicode will improve natural language processing
16. ^ "Why Unicode is Needed". Google Lawmaking: Zawgyi Project . Retrieved 31 October 2013.
17. ^ "Myanmar Scripts and Languages". Oftentimes Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 24 December 2019. "UTF-8" technically does not apply to advertizing hoc font encodings such every bit Zawgyi.
18. ^ LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019). "Integrating autoconversion: Facebook's path from Zawgyi to Unicode - Facebook Applied science". Facebook Engineering. Facebook. Retrieved 25 Dec 2019. Information technology makes communication on digital platforms hard, as content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. ... In order to improve reach their audiences, content producers in Myanmar oftentimes postal service in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a single post, non to mention English language or other languages.
19. ^ Saw Yi Nanda (21 November 2019). "Myanmar switch to Unicode to take two years: app developer". The Myanmar Times . Retrieved 24 December 2019.

External links [edit]

Share this post