Ââ Ââ I Will Always Write Back:ã‚â How One Letter Changed Two Lives Free Read Pdf Online

Garbled text as a issue of incorrect character encoding

Mojibake ( 文字化け ; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the upshot of text existence decoded using an unintended character encoding.^[i] The result is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, often from a different writing organization.

This brandish may include the generic replacement character ("�") in places where the binary representation is considered invalid. A replacement tin can also involve multiple consecutive symbols, equally viewed in i encoding, when the same binary code constitutes i symbol in the other encoding. This is either because of differing abiding length encoding (as in Asian xvi-bit encodings vs European viii-fleck encodings), or the employ 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 unlike consequence that is non to exist confused with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the lawmaking point displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement character. Importantly, these replacements are valid and are the effect of correct error handling by the software.

Etymology [edit]

Mojibake means "character transformation" in Japanese. The discussion 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 betwixt the encoded data and the notion of its encoding must exist preserved. Every bit mojibake is the instance of non-compliance between these, information technology can be achieved by manipulating the information itself, or just relabeling it.

Mojibake is often seen with text data that have been tagged with a wrong encoding; it may not even be tagged at all, merely moved between computers with unlike 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 data.

The differing default settings between computers are in part due to differing deployments of Unicode among operating organization families, and partly the legacy encodings' specializations for different writing systems of human being languages. Whereas Linux distributions by and large switched to UTF-viii in 2004,^[two] Microsoft Windows generally uses UTF-16, and sometimes uses 8-bit code pages for text files in dissimilar languages.^{[ dubious – discuss ]}

For some writing systems, an instance being Japanese, several encodings have historically been employed, causing users to come across mojibake relatively ofttimes. As a Japanese example, the word mojibake "文字化け" stored as EUC-JP might exist incorrectly displayed as "ﾊｸｻ�ｽ､ｱ", "ﾊｸｻ嵂ｽ､ｱ" (MS-932), or "ﾊｸｻ郾ｽ､ｱ" (Shift JIS-2004). The aforementioned text stored as UTF-viii is displayed equally "譁�蟄怜喧縺�" if interpreted as Shift JIS. This is farther exacerbated if other locales are involved: the same UTF-8 text appears equally "文字化ã'" in software that assumes text to be in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-1 encodings, commonly labelled Western, or (for example) equally "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted as being in a GBK (Mainland 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 non specified, it is upwards to the software to make up one's mind it past other means. Depending on the type of software, the typical solution is either configuration or charset detection heuristics. Both are prone to mis-prediction in non-so-uncommon scenarios.

The encoding of text files is affected past locale setting, which depends on the user's language, brand of operating organization and possibly other conditions. Therefore, the assumed encoding is systematically incorrect for files that come up from a computer with a dissimilar setting, or even from a differently localized software within the same system. For Unicode, one solution is to employ a byte order mark, but for source code and other automobile readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Another is storing the encoding as metadata in the file system. File systems that support extended file attributes can shop this equally user.charset.^[3] This likewise 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-eight, at that place are many that are hard to distinguish (see charset detection). A web browser may not be able to distinguish a folio coded in EUC-JP and some other in Shift-JIS if the coding scheme is not assigned explicitly using HTTP headers sent along 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 likewise occurs when the encoding is wrongly specified. This often happens between encodings that are similar. For case, the Eudora email client for Windows was known to transport 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 oftentimes seen being curved quotation marks and extra dashes), that were not displayed properly in software complying with the ISO standard; this specially affected software running under other operating systems such as Unix.

Human ignorance [edit]

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

• Compatibility can exist a deceptive belongings, 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 label whatever superset of ASCII they actually utilize every bit "ASCII". Maybe for simplification, but even in academic literature, the word "ASCII" tin can exist institute used as an example of something not compatible with Unicode, where evidently "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-8.^[ane] Note that UTF-8 is backwards compatible with ASCII.

Overspecification [edit]

When in that location are layers of protocols, each trying to specify the encoding based on different information, the least certain information may be misleading to the recipient. For example, consider a spider web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The grapheme set may be communicated to the client in any number of three ways:

• in the HTTP header. This information can be based on server configuration (for instance, 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-equiv or charset) or the encoding attribute of an XML declaration. This is the encoding that the writer meant to salve the particular file in.
• in the file, as a byte social club marking. This is the encoding that the author'due south editor actually saved it in. Unless an accidental encoding conversion has happened (by opening it in one encoding and saving information technology in some other), this will be correct. It is, notwithstanding, 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 up and the character set typically cannot be altered. The character table contained within the display firmware volition be localized to take characters for the country the device is to be sold in, and typically the table differs from state to country. Every bit such, these systems will potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a system from a dissimilar country. Likewise, many early on operating systems do non support multiple encoding formats and thus will end up 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 volition only support encoding standards relevant to the state the localized version will exist sold in, and will display mojibake if a file containing a text in a unlike encoding format from the version that the OS is designed to back up is opened.

Resolutions [edit]

Applications using UTF-8 every bit a default encoding may achieve a greater degree of interoperability because of its widespread apply and backward compatibility with U.s.a.-ASCII. UTF-viii also has the ability to be directly recognised by a simple algorithm, then that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-eight up 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 information technology. Two of the almost mutual applications in which mojibake may occur are spider web browsers and word processors. Mod browsers and word processors often support a wide array of graphic symbol encodings. Browsers often allow a user to modify their rendering engine's encoding setting on the fly, while discussion processors allow the user to select the appropriate encoding when opening a file. It may accept some trial and error for users to discover the correct encoding.

The problem gets more complicated when information technology occurs in an awarding that normally does non support a wide range of character encoding, such as in a non-Unicode estimator game. In this example, the user must alter the operating system'southward encoding settings to lucifer that of the game. However, changing the organization-wide encoding settings can also cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or afterward, a user likewise has the selection to use Microsoft AppLocale, an application that allows the irresolute of per-awarding locale settings. Nevertheless, changing the operating arrangement encoding settings is not possible on earlier operating systems such every bit Windows 98; to resolve this issue on earlier operating systems, a user would accept to apply third party font rendering applications.

Problems in different writing systems [edit]

English language [edit]

Mojibake in English language texts generally occurs in punctuation, such as em dashes (—), en dashes (–), and curly quotes (",",','), merely rarely in character text, since most encodings hold with ASCII on the encoding of the English alphabet. For instance, the pound sign "£" will appear as "£" if it was encoded by the sender every bit UTF-8 only interpreted by the recipient as 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 text. Commodore brand 8-bit computers used PETSCII encoding, specially notable for inverting the upper and lower case compared to standard ASCII. PETSCII printers worked fine on other computers of the era, only flipped the instance of all letters. IBM mainframes utilize the EBCDIC encoding which does not lucifer ASCII at all.

Other Western European languages [edit]

The alphabets of the North Germanic languages, Catalan, Finnish, German, French, Portuguese and Spanish are all extensions of the Latin alphabet. The additional characters are typically the ones that become 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
• á, ð, í, ó, ú, ý, æ, ø in Faroese
• á, ð, é, í, ó, ú, ý, þ, æ, ö in Icelandic
• à, â, ç, è, é, ë, ê, ï, î, ô, ù, û, ü, ÿ, æ, œ in French
• à, è, é, ì, ò, ù in Italian
• á, é, í, ñ, ó, ú, ü, ¡, ¿ in Spanish
• à, á, â, ã, ç, é, ê, í, ó, ô, õ, ú in Portuguese (ü no longer used)
• á, é, í, ó, ú in Irish
• à, è, ì, ò, ù in Scottish Gaelic
• £ in British English

… and their uppercase counterparts, if applicable.

These are languages for which the ISO-8859-1 graphic symbol set (too known equally Latin 1 or Western) has been in apply. However, ISO-8859-1 has been obsoleted by two competing standards, the astern compatible Windows-1252, and the slightly altered ISO-8859-fifteen. Both add the Euro sign € and the French œ, but otherwise any confusion of these three character sets does not create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is always safe to interpret ISO-8859-1 as Windows-1252, and adequately condom to interpret it equally ISO-8859-15, in detail with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). All the same, with the advent of UTF-eight, mojibake has become more mutual in certain scenarios, due east.g. exchange of text files betwixt UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-8's incompatibility with Latin-i and Windows-1252. But UTF-8 has the power to be direct recognised by a simple algorithm, so that well written software should be able to avert mixing UTF-8 up with other encodings, so this was most common when many had software not supporting UTF-eight. Nearly of these languages were supported past MS-DOS default CP437 and other automobile default encodings, except ASCII, and then problems when buying an operating system version were less common. Windows and MS-DOS are not uniform however.

In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and German, vowels are rarely repeated, and information technology is ordinarily obvious when one character gets corrupted, e.g. the second letter in "kÃ⁠¤rlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This fashion, even though the reader has to guess between å, ä and ö, nearly all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other hand, does characteristic repeating vowels in words like hääyö ("wedding nighttime") which tin can sometimes render text very hard to read (e.g. hääyö appears as "hÃ⁠¤Ã⁠¤yÃ⁠¶"). Icelandic and Faroese have ten and eight peradventure confounding characters, respectively, which thus tin make it more difficult to gauge corrupted characters; Icelandic words similar þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") become almost entirely unintelligible when rendered as "þjóðlöð".

In German, Buchstabensalat ("letter of the alphabet 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 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 High german linguistic communication sphere than in the Nordic countries. For instance, in Norwegian, digraphs are associated with archaic Danish, and may be used jokingly. However, digraphs are useful in communication with other parts of the world. As an instance, 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-eight misinterpreted as ISO-8859-ane, "Band meg nÃ¥" (" Band meg nå "), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Kingdom of norway in June 2014.^[5]

Examples

Swedish case:		Smörgås (open sandwich)
File encoding	Setting in browser	Upshot
MS-DOS 437	ISO 8859-1	Sm"rg†s
ISO 8859-1	Mac Roman	SmˆrgÂs
UTF-8	ISO 8859-1	Smörgås
UTF-8	Mac Roman	Smörgås

Central and Eastern European [edit]

Users of Key and Eastern European languages tin can besides be afflicted. Because most 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-eight), often also varying by operating system.

Hungarian [edit]

Hungarian is another afflicted language, which uses the 26 basic English characters, plus the accented forms á, é, í, ó, ú, ö, ü (all nowadays in the Latin-1 character fix), plus the two characters ő and ű, which are non in Latin-1. These 2 characters can exist correctly encoded in Latin-2, Windows-1250 and Unicode. Before Unicode became common in east-mail clients, e-mails containing Hungarian text often had the letters ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the bespeak of unrecognizability. Information technology is common to reply to an electronic mail rendered unreadable (see examples below) by character mangling (referred to every bit "betűszemét", significant "letter of the alphabet garbage") with the phrase "Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép", a nonsense phrase (literally "Flood-resistant mirror-drilling machine") containing all accented characters used in Hungarian.

Examples [edit]

Source encoding	Target encoding	Upshot	Occurrence
Hungarian example		ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép	Characters in red are incorrect and do not match the meridian-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; nonetheless, the operating system, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Delight note that minor-instance letters are mainly correct, exception with ő (ï) and ű (√). Ü/ü is correct because CP 852 was made compatible with German. Present 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 brandish or printer uses the default CP 437 encoding. This encoding was heavily used in the 1980s and early 1990s, just present it is completely deprecated.
Windows-1250	Windows-1252	ÁRVÍZTÛRÕ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztûrõ tükörfúrógép	The default Western Windows encoding is used instead of the Central-European i. But ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are wrong, just the text is completely readable. This is the most common error present; due to ignorance, it occurs often on webpages or even in printed media.
CP 852	Windows-1250	µRVÖZTëRŠ TšThousand™RFéRŕG P rvˇztűr‹ t k"rfŁr˘thou‚p	Key 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§ tŘthou÷rf˙rˇchiliadÚp	Fundamental European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The use of ű is correct.
Quoted-printable	7-flake ASCII	=C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5 T=DC1000=D6RF=DAR=D3G=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F3g=E9p	Mainly caused by wrongly configured mail servers but may occur in SMS letters on some cell-phones also.
UTF-viii	Windows-1252	ÁRVÍZTÅ°RŐ TÃœKÖRFÚRÃ"ThousandÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tüthousandörfúrógép	Mainly caused by wrongly configured web services or webmail clients, which were non tested for international usage (every bit the problem remains concealed for English texts). In this case the bodily (often generated) content is in UTF-8; however, it is not configured in the HTML headers, so the rendering engine displays information technology with the default Western encoding.

Shine [edit]

Prior to the cosmos of ISO 8859-two in 1987, users of diverse computing platforms used their own character encodings such equally AmigaPL on Amiga, Atari Club on Atari ST and Masovia, IBM CP852, Mazovia and Windows CP1250 on IBM PCs. Smoothen companies selling early on DOS computers created their own mutually-incompatible ways to encode Smooth characters and merely reprogrammed the EPROMs of the video cards (typically CGA, EGA, or Hercules) to provide hardware lawmaking pages with the needed glyphs for Shine—arbitrarily located without reference to where other computer sellers had placed them.

The situation began to improve when, subsequently pressure from academic and user groups, ISO 8859-two succeeded equally the "Internet standard" with limited support of the dominant vendors' software (today largely replaced past Unicode). With the numerous problems acquired past 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 past several systems for encoding Cyrillic.^[6] The Soviet Union and early Russian Federation developed KOI encodings ( Kod Obmena Informatsiey , Код Обмена Информацией , which translates to "Code for Information Exchange"). This began with Cyrillic-only vii-chip KOI7, based on ASCII but 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 just with high-bit ready octets corresponding to 7-flake codes from KOI7. It is for this reason that KOI8 text, fifty-fifty Russian, remains partially readable subsequently stripping the 8th flake, which was considered as a major advantage in the age of 8BITMIME-unaware email systems. For instance, words " Школа русского языка " shkola russkogo yazyka , encoded in KOI8 and so passed through the high bit stripping process, end upward rendered as "[KOLA RUSSKOGO qZYKA". Eventually KOI8 gained unlike flavors for Russian and Bulgarian (KOI8-R), Ukrainian (KOI8-U), Belarusan (KOI8-RU) and even Tajik (KOI8-T).

Meanwhile, in the West, Lawmaking folio 866 supported Ukrainian and Belarusian as well every bit Russian/Bulgarian in MS-DOS. For Microsoft Windows, Code 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 globe'southward languages, including all Cyrillic characters.

Before Unicode, it was necessary to lucifer text encoding with a font using the same encoding arrangement. Failure to do this produced unreadable gibberish whose specific appearance varied depending on the exact combination of text encoding and font encoding. For example, attempting to view not-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 same ASCII region, but 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 wrong Cyrillic font. During the early years of the Russian sector of the World wide web, both KOI8 and codepage 1251 were mutual. As of 2017, i can withal encounter HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, besides as Unicode. (An estimated i.seven% of all web pages worldwide – all languages included – are encoded in codepage 1251.^[7]) Though the HTML standard includes the ability to specify the encoding for whatever given spider web page in its source,^[8] this is sometimes neglected, forcing the user to switch encodings in the browser manually.

In Bulgarian, mojibake is often called majmunica ( маймуница ), meaning "monkey'south [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is called đubre ( ђубре ), pregnant "trash". Different the former USSR, South Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Page 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 own MIK encoding, which is superficially similar to (although incompatible with) CP866.

Case

Russian example:		Кракозябры ( krakozyabry , garbage characters)
File encoding	Setting in browser	Issue
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 dialects of the Yugoslav Serbo-Croatian language) and Slovenian add to the basic 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 Slovenian; officially, although others are used when needed, by and large in foreign names, equally well). All of these messages 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 there because of some other languages.

Although Mojibake tin can occur with any of these characters, the letters that are not included in Windows-1252 are much more than prone to errors. Thus, even present, "šđčćž ŠĐČĆŽ" is often displayed equally "šðèæž ŠÐÈÆŽ", although ð, è, æ, È, Æ are never used in Slavic languages.

When confined to bones ASCII (well-nigh user names, for example), mutual 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 introduce ambiguities, so reconstructing the original from such a form is normally washed manually if required.

The Windows-1252 encoding is important considering the English language versions of the Windows operating system are most widespread, non localized ones.^{[ citation needed ]} The reasons for this include a relatively small and fragmented market, increasing the price of high quality localization, a loftier caste of software piracy (in plough acquired by high price of software compared to income), which discourages localization efforts, and people preferring English language versions of Windows and other software.^{[ citation needed ]}

The drive to differentiate Croatian from Serbian, Bosnian from Croatian and Serbian, and now even Montenegrin from the other three creates many problems. There are many unlike localizations, using unlike standards and of different quality. There are no common translations for the vast corporeality of computer terminology originating in English. In the end, people utilize adopted English 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 card is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who sympathise English, besides equally those who are accustomed to English terminology (who are most, considering English terminology is besides generally taught in schools considering of these problems) regularly cull the original English versions of not-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 let the code page 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 tin be set to nigh non-right-to-left single-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 trouble is particularly acute in the case of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a set up of obsolete character encodings for the Armenian alphabet which accept been superseded by Unicode standards. ArmSCII is not widely used considering of a lack of back up in the estimator manufacture. For case, Microsoft Windows does not back up information technology.

Asian encodings [edit]

Some other type of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such equally one of the encodings for E Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more than one (typically ii) characters are corrupted at once, due east.g. "k舐lek" ( kärlek ) in Swedish, where " är " is parsed as "舐". Compared to the above mojibake, this is harder to read, since messages unrelated to the problematic å, ä or ö are missing, and is peculiarly problematic for curt words starting with å, ä or ö such every bit "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since two letters are combined, the mojibake also seems more random (over 50 variants compared to the normal iii, not counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an unabridged text string which happens to include a pattern of item give-and-take lengths, such every bit the sentence "Bush hid the facts", may exist misinterpreted.

Japanese [edit]

In Japanese, the phenomenon is, as mentioned, called mojibake ( 文字化け ). Information technology is a particular problem in Nippon due to the numerous different encodings that exist for Japanese text. Alongside Unicode encodings similar UTF-8 and UTF-16, there are other standard encodings, such as Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, too equally being encountered by Japanese users, is besides often encountered by non-Japanese when attempting to run software written for the Japanese marketplace.

Chinese [edit]

In Chinese, the same phenomenon is called Luàn mǎ (Pinyin, Simplified Chinese 乱码 , Traditional Chinese 亂碼 , significant 'chaotic code'), and tin can occur when computerised text is encoded in i Chinese character encoding but is displayed using the incorrect encoding. When this occurs, information technology is often possible to set up the outcome by switching the grapheme encoding without loss of data. The situation is complicated because of the beingness of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the well-nigh common ones being: Unicode, Big5, and Guobiao (with several backward 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 as	Result	Original text	Annotation
Big5	GB	?T瓣в变巨肚	三國志曹操傳	Garbled Chinese characters with no hint of original meaning. The ruby-red character is not a valid codepoint in GB2312.
Shift-JIS	GB	暥帤壔偗僥僗僩	文字化けテスト	Kana is displayed every bit characters with the radical 亻, while kanji are other characters. Nearly of them are extremely uncommon and non in practical apply in modern Chinese.
EUC-KR	GB	叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨	디제이맥스 테크니카	Random common Simplified Chinese characters which in most cases brand no sense. Hands identifiable because of spaces between every several characters.

An additional problem is caused 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 vocalist David Tao (Chinese: 陶喆; pinyin: Táo Zhé )'s "喆" missing in Big5, ex-People's republic of china Premier Zhu Rongji (Chinese: 朱镕基; pinyin: Zhū Róngjī )'south "镕" missing in GB2312, copyright symbol "©" missing in GBK.^[9]

Newspapers have dealt with this problem in diverse ways, including using software to combine two existing, similar characters; using a moving picture of the personality; or simply substituting a homophone for the rare character in the promise that the reader would exist able to make the right inference.

Indic text [edit]

A similar effect 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 character set employed is properly recognized by the application. This is considering, in many Indic scripts, the rules by which individual letter symbols combine to create symbols for syllables may non exist properly understood past a computer missing the appropriate software, even if the glyphs for the individual letter forms are available.

One case of this is the old Wikipedia logo, which attempts to show the grapheme coordinating 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, easily recognizable equally mojibake generated past a reckoner non configured to display Indic text.^[x] The logo equally 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 information technology makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters (syllables) beyond all operating systems. For case, the 'reph', the curt form for 'r' is a diacritic that unremarkably goes on top of a apparently alphabetic character. Notwithstanding, information technology is incorrect to go on tiptop of some letters similar '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 information technology on tiptop of these letters. By contrast, for similar sounds in modern languages which result from their specific rules, it is not put on top, such as the word करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stem form of the common give-and-take करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marathi language.^[eleven] But it happens in most operating systems. This appears to be a error of internal programming of the fonts. In Mac OS and iOS, the muurdhaja l (nighttime fifty) and 'u' combination and its long course both yield incorrect shapes.^{[ commendation needed ]}

Some Indic and Indic-derived scripts, nigh 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^[xiii] and the late 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 support is via the Zawgyi font, a font that was created every bit 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 as advert hoc font encodings.^[17] With the advent of mobile phones, mobile vendors such as Samsung and Huawei simply replaced the Unicode compliant arrangement fonts with Zawgyi versions.^[14]

Due to these advert hoc encodings, communications between users of Zawgyi and Unicode would return as garbled text. To get around this issue, content producers would make posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.^[18] Myanmar government has designated 1 Oct 2019 every bit "U-Mean solar day" to officially switch to Unicode.^[13] The full transition is estimated to accept ii years.^[19]

African languages [edit]

In certain writing systems of Africa, unencoded text is unreadable. Texts that may produce mojibake include those from the Horn of Africa such as the Ge'ez script in Federal democratic republic of ethiopia and Eritrea, used for Amharic, Tigre, and other languages, and the Somali linguistic communication, which employs the Osmanya alphabet. In Southern Africa, the Mwangwego alphabet is used to write languages of Malawi and the Mandombe alphabet was created for the Congo-kinshasa, but these are not by and large supported. Various other writing systems native to West Africa present similar problems, such as the Due north'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Republic of liberia.

Standard arabic [edit]

Another affected language is Arabic (run across below). The text becomes unreadable when the encodings practice non match.

Examples [edit]

File encoding	Setting in browser	Outcome
Standard arabic example:		(Universal Declaration of Human 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 8859-5	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 commodity practise not have UTF-8 equally browser setting, because UTF-eight is hands recognisable, so if a browser supports UTF-8 it should recognise it automatically, and not try to translate something else as UTF-viii.

Run across also [edit]

• Code indicate
• Replacement character
• Substitute character
• Newline – The conventions for representing the line break differ between Windows and Unix systems. Though most software supports both conventions (which is piffling), software that must preserve or brandish the difference (east.one thousand. version control systems and data comparing tools) can go essentially more hard to use if not adhering to one convention.
• Byte society 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, merely will by design be perceived as "garbage characters" to incompliant software (including many interpreters).
• HTML entities – An encoding of special characters in HTML, mostly optional, just required for certain characters to escape interpretation equally 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 so on.

• Bush-league hid the facts

References [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b} King, Ritchie (2012). "Will unicode soon be the universal lawmaking? [The Information]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (7): 60. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
2. ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "curl -five linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved five Oct 2018.
3. ^ "Guidelines for extended attributes". 2013-05-17. Retrieved 2015-02-15 .
4. ^ "Unicode mailinglist on the Eudora email client". 2001-05-13. 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, Globe Pequot, 2007, ISBN 1-59921-039-viii.
7. ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
8. ^ "Declaring graphic symbol encodings in HTML".
9. ^ "Red china GBK (XGB)". Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2002-10-01. Conversion map betwixt Code page 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's Logo Fractures the Sanskrit". The New York Times . Retrieved July 17, 2009.
11. ^ https://marathi.indiatyping.com/
12. ^ "Content Moved (Windows)". Msdn.microsoft.com. Retrieved 2014-02-05 .
13. ^ ^{a b} "Unicode in, Zawgyi out: Modernity finally catches upwardly in Myanmar's digital globe". The Japan Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved 24 Dec 2019. Oct. 1 is "U-Twenty-four hour period", when Myanmar officially volition prefer the new organisation.... Microsoft and Apple helped other countries standardize years ago, but 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 fabricated it possible for Windows to render a Unicode-compliant Burmese font such equally Myanmar1 (released in 2005). ... Myazedi, BIT, and later Zawgyi, circumscribed the rendering problem by adding extra lawmaking points that were reserved for Myanmar'southward ethnic languages. Not only does the re-mapping prevent time to come ethnic language support, it also results in a typing organisation that can exist disruptive and inefficient, even for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the ii most popular smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated simply by capturing the largest marketplace share, which means they support Zawgyi out of the box.
15. ^ ^{a b} Sin, Thant (7 September 2019). "Unified under one font system as Myanmar prepares to migrate from Zawgyi to Unicode". Ascent Voices . Retrieved 24 December 2019. Standard Myanmar Unicode fonts were never mainstreamed dissimilar the private and partially Unicode compliant Zawgyi font. ... Unicode will improve natural language processing
16. ^ "Why Unicode is Needed". Google Code: Zawgyi Project . Retrieved 31 October 2013.
17. ^ "Myanmar Scripts and Languages". Frequently Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 24 Dec 2019. "UTF-8" technically does not use to advertising hoc font encodings such equally Zawgyi.
18. ^ LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019). "Integrating autoconversion: Facebook'south path from Zawgyi to Unicode - Facebook Engineering". Facebook Engineering. Facebook. Retrieved 25 December 2019. It makes communication on digital platforms hard, as content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. ... In club to ameliorate accomplish their audiences, content producers in Myanmar often postal service in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a single mail service, not to mention English or other languages.
19. ^ Saw Yi Nanda (21 Nov 2019). "Myanmar switch to Unicode to take two years: app developer". The Myanmar Times . Retrieved 24 December 2019.

External links [edit]

Ââ Ã‚â I Will Always Write Back:ã‚â  How One Letter Changed Two Lives Free Read Pdf Online

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake

Share :