Help I Lost Myself Again Ñâãâºãâ°ã‘‡ãâ°ã‘‚ã‘å’

Garbled text every bit a event of wrong grapheme encoding

Mojibake (Japanese: 文字化け; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the result of text being decoded using an unintended character encoding.^[1] The result is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, oft from a different writing system.

This brandish may include the generic replacement character ("�") in places where the binary representation is considered invalid. A replacement tin can also involve multiple consecutive symbols, as viewed in one encoding, when the aforementioned binary code constitutes one symbol in the other encoding. This is either considering of differing constant length encoding (as in Asian 16-fleck encodings vs European 8-fleck encodings), or the use 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 event that is not to be confused with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the code point displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement character. Chiefly, these replacements are valid and are the result of correct fault handling by the software.

Etymology [edit]

Mojibake ways "character transformation" in Japanese. The word is equanimous of 文字 (moji, IPA: [mod͡ʑi]), "grapheme" 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 be preserved. As mojibake is the instance of not-compliance between these, information technology tin can be achieved past manipulating the data itself, or just relabeling it.

Mojibake is often seen with text data that have been tagged with a incorrect encoding; it may not fifty-fifty be tagged at all, just moved between computers with different default encodings. A major source of trouble are communication protocols that rely on settings on each estimator rather than sending or storing metadata together with the information.

The differing default settings between computers are in 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,^[two] Microsoft Windows by and large uses UTF-xvi, and sometimes uses 8-bit code pages for text files in different languages.^{[ dubious – discuss ]}

For some writing systems, an example being Japanese, several encodings take historically been employed, causing users to see mojibake relatively often. As a Japanese case, the word mojibake "文字化け" stored as EUC-JP might be incorrectly displayed as "ﾊｸｻ�ｽ､ｱ", "ﾊｸｻ嵂ｽ､ｱ" (MS-932), or "ﾊｸｻ郾ｽ､ｱ" (Shift JIS-2004). The aforementioned text stored as UTF-eight is displayed equally "譁�蟄怜喧縺�" if interpreted as Shift JIS. This is further exacerbated if other locales are involved: the same UTF-eight text appears as "文字化ã'" in software that assumes text to be in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-i encodings, commonly labelled Western, or (for example) equally "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted as being in a GBK (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 equally Shift-JIS encoding	ﾊ	ｸ	ｻ	郾		ｽ	､	ｱ
Bytes interpreted as ISO-8859-1 encoding	Ê	¸	»	ú	²	½	¤	±
Bytes interpreted equally GBK encoding	矢		机		步		け

Underspecification [edit]

If the encoding is not specified, it is up to the software to make up one's mind it by other means. Depending on the blazon of software, the typical solution is either configuration or charset detection heuristics. Both are prone to mis-prediction in non-so-uncommon scenarios.

The encoding of text files is affected by locale setting, which depends on the user's linguistic communication, make of operating arrangement and mayhap other conditions. Therefore, the assumed encoding is systematically wrong for files that come up from a estimator with a dissimilar setting, or even from a differently localized software within the same system. For Unicode, i solution is to use a byte order mark, but for source lawmaking and other machine readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Another is storing the encoding as metadata in the file system. File systems that back up extended file attributes can store this as user.charset.^[3] 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 easy to observe, in particular UTF-8, there are many that are hard to distinguish (encounter charset detection). A web browser may not be able to distinguish a page coded in EUC-JP and another in Shift-JIS if the coding scheme is not assigned explicitly using HTTP headers sent along with the documents, or using the HTML document'south meta tags that are used to substitute for missing HTTP headers if the server cannot exist configured to send the proper HTTP headers; run into 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 every bit ISO-8859-ane that were in reality Windows-1252.^[4] The Mac OS version of Eudora did non showroom this behaviour. Windows-1252 contains extra printable characters in the C1 range (the most often seen being curved quotation marks and actress dashes), that were not displayed properly in software complying with the ISO standard; this especially affected software running nether other operating systems such as Unix.

Human ignorance [edit]

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

• Compatibility can be a deceptive belongings, equally the mutual subset of characters is unaffected by a mixup of two encodings (encounter Bug in unlike writing systems).
• People think they are using ASCII, and tend to characterization any superset of ASCII they actually employ as "ASCII". Maybe for simplification, but even in academic literature, the discussion "ASCII" can be plant used every bit an example of something not compatible with Unicode, where evidently "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-eight.^[ane] Note that UTF-8 is backwards compatible with ASCII.

Overspecification [edit]

When there 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 example, consider a spider web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The character set may be communicated to the client in any number of 3 means:

• 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 aspect of an XML declaration. This is the encoding that the author meant to relieve the particular file in.
• in the file, equally a byte society marking. This is the encoding that the author'south editor actually saved it in. Unless an adventitious encoding conversion has happened (by opening it in one encoding and saving it in another), this will exist right. It is, however, but bachelor in Unicode encodings such equally UTF-8 or UTF-sixteen.

Lack of hardware or software back up [edit]

Much older hardware is typically designed to support only ane character ready and the character set typically cannot exist contradistinct. The character table independent within the display firmware will be localized to accept characters for the country the device is to exist sold in, and typically the table differs from country to country. As such, these systems will potentially brandish mojibake when loading text generated on a organization from a different state. Besides, many early on operating systems practise not back up multiple encoding formats and thus will cease up displaying mojibake if made to display non-standard text—early versions of Microsoft Windows and Palm Bone for case, are localized on a per-country basis and will just back up encoding standards relevant to the country the localized version will exist sold in, and will display mojibake if a file containing a text in a dissimilar encoding format from the version that the OS is designed to back up is opened.

Resolutions [edit]

Applications using UTF-8 as a default encoding may achieve a greater degree of interoperability because of its widespread use and backward compatibility with US-ASCII. UTF-8 also has the ability to be directly recognised past a uncomplicated algorithm, and so that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-viii up with other encodings.

The difficulty of resolving an instance of mojibake varies depending on the awarding inside which it occurs and the causes of it. 2 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 assortment of graphic symbol encodings. Browsers often permit a user to change their rendering engine's encoding setting on the wing, while word processors allow the user to select the appropriate encoding when opening a file. Information technology may take some trial and fault for users to find the correct encoding.

The problem gets more complicated when it occurs in an application that normally does not support a wide range of character encoding, such every bit in a not-Unicode computer game. In this case, the user must change the operating system'southward encoding settings to match that of the game. However, changing the organisation-wide encoding settings can likewise crusade Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or afterward, a user also has the option to use Microsoft AppLocale, an application that allows the changing of per-application locale settings. Fifty-fifty then, irresolute the operating system encoding settings is not possible on earlier operating systems such equally Windows 98; to resolve this issue on earlier operating systems, a user would have to use third party font rendering applications.

Problems in different writing systems [edit]

English [edit]

Mojibake in English texts more often than not occurs in punctuation, such as em dashes (—), en dashes (–), and curly quotes (",",','), but rarely in character text, since nearly encodings agree with ASCII on the encoding of the English alphabet. For instance, the pound sign "£" will appear as "£" if information technology was encoded by the sender as UTF-viii but interpreted by the recipient every bit CP1252 or ISO 8859-ane. If iterated using CP1252, this tin lead to "£", "£", "ÃÆ'‚£", etc.

Some computers did, in older eras, have vendor-specific encodings which acquired mismatch too for English text. Commodore brand eight-bit 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, just flipped the example of all letters. IBM mainframes apply the EBCDIC encoding which does not match ASCII at all.

Other Western European languages [edit]

The alphabets of the Due 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 get corrupted, making texts only 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 uppercase counterparts, if applicable.

These are languages for which the ISO-8859-ane character set (too known as Latin 1 or Western) has been in use. Still, ISO-8859-one has been obsoleted by two competing standards, the backward compatible Windows-1252, and the slightly altered ISO-8859-xv. Both add the Euro sign € and the French œ, only otherwise any defoliation of these 3 graphic symbol sets does not create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is always safety to interpret ISO-8859-1 as Windows-1252, and adequately safe to interpret it as ISO-8859-15, in particular with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). However, with the advent of UTF-eight, mojibake has become more common in sure scenarios, e.1000. commutation of text files betwixt UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-8's incompatibility with Latin-one and Windows-1252. Merely UTF-8 has the power to be directly 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-viii. Virtually of these languages were supported by MS-DOS default CP437 and other machine default encodings, except ASCII, so issues when ownership an operating system version were less mutual. Windows and MS-DOS are not compatible however.

In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and German language, vowels are rarely repeated, and information technology is commonly obvious when ane graphic symbol gets corrupted, eastward.g. the 2nd letter in "kÃ⁠¤rlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This way, even though the reader has to judge between å, ä and ö, well-nigh all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other hand, does feature repeating vowels in words similar hääyö ("nuptials night") which can sometimes render text very hard to read (eastward.thousand. hääyö appears every bit "hÃ⁠¤Ã⁠¤yÃ⁠¶"). Icelandic and Faroese have x and viii possibly confounding characters, respectively, which thus tin can make it more difficult to approximate corrupted characters; Icelandic words like þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") go most entirely unintelligible when rendered equally "þjóðlöð".

In German, Buchstabensalat ("letter salad") is a mutual term for this phenomenon, and in Spanish, deformación (literally deformation).

Some users transliterate their writing when using a reckoner, either past 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 language when umlauts are non available. The latter exercise seems to be better tolerated in the German language sphere than in the Nordic countries. For example, in Norwegian, digraphs are associated with archaic Danish, and may be used jokingly. However, digraphs are useful in communication with other parts of the world. As an case, the Norwegian football player Ole Gunnar Solskjær had his name spelled "SOLSKJAER" on his back when he played for Manchester United.

An antiquity of UTF-8 misinterpreted as ISO-8859-1, "Ring meg nÃ¥" (" Ring 1000000 nå "), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Norway in June 2014.^[5]

Examples

Swedish example:		Smörgås (open sandwich)
File encoding	Setting in browser	Issue
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	Smörgåsouthward

Central and Eastern European [edit]

Users of Central and Eastern European languages can also be affected. Because nigh computers were not continued to any network during the mid- to late-1980s, there were unlike character encodings for every language with diacritical characters (run into ISO/IEC 8859 and KOI-8), frequently likewise varying past operating system.

Hungarian [edit]

Hungarian is another affected linguistic communication, 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 set), plus the two characters ő and ű, which are not in Latin-1. These two characters can be correctly encoded in Latin-2, Windows-1250 and Unicode. Earlier Unicode became common in email clients, east-mails containing Hungarian text often had the letters ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the point of unrecognizability. It is mutual to reply to an due east-post rendered unreadable (run across examples below) by character mangling (referred to as "betűszemét", meaning "alphabetic character garbage") with the phrase "Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép", a nonsense phrase (literally "Flood-resistant mirror-drilling motorcar") containing all accented characters used in Hungarian.

Examples [edit]

Source encoding	Target encoding	Result	Occurrence
Hungarian example		ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép	Characters in cherry are incorrect and do not friction match the top-left example.
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; still, the operating system, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Please note that small-case letters are mainly right, exception with ő (ï) and ű (√). Ü/ü is correct because CP 852 was fabricated compatible with German. Nowadays occurs mainly on printed prescriptions and cheques.
CWI-two	CP 437	ÅRVìZTÿRº TÜKÖRFùRòGÉP árvíztûrô tükörfúrógép	The CWI-ii encoding was designed so that the text remains fairly well-readable even if the display or printer uses the default CP 437 encoding. This encoding was heavily used in the 1980s and early on 1990s, simply nowadays it is completely deprecated.
Windows-1250	Windows-1252	ÁRVÍZTÛRÕ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztûrõ tükörfúrógép	The default Western Windows encoding is used instead of the Central-European one. Only ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are wrong, but the text is completely readable. This is the virtually mutual fault nowadays; due to ignorance, it occurs often on webpages or even in printed media.
CP 852	Windows-1250	µRVÖZTëRŠ TšK™RFéRŕYard P rvˇztűr‹ t thou"rfŁr˘g‚p	Central European Windows encoding is used instead of DOS encoding. The use of ű is right.
Windows-1250	CP 852	┴RV═ZT█RŇ T▄ThousandÍRF┌RËG╔P ßrvÝztűr§ tŘk÷rf˙rˇgÚp	Central European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The apply of ű is right.
Quoted-printable	7-bit ASCII	=C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5 T=DCK=D6RF=DAR=D3G=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F3g=E9p	Mainly caused by wrongly configured mail servers just may occur in SMS messages on some jail cell-phones likewise.
UTF-eight	Windows-1252	ÁRVÍZTÅ°RŐ TÃœGÖRFÚRÃ"GÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tükörfúrókép	Mainly acquired 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 case the actual (often generated) content is in UTF-viii; however, information technology is non configured in the HTML headers, so the rendering engine displays it with the default Western encoding.

Polish [edit]

Prior to the creation of ISO 8859-2 in 1987, users of various computing platforms used their own grapheme encodings such equally AmigaPL on Amiga, Atari Social club on Atari ST and Masovia, IBM CP852, Mazovia and Windows CP1250 on IBM PCs. Polish companies selling early on DOS computers created their own mutually-incompatible means to encode Smooth characters and only reprogrammed the EPROMs of the video cards (typically CGA, EGA, or Hercules) to provide hardware code pages with the needed glyphs for Smoothen—arbitrarily located without reference to where other computer sellers had placed them.

The state of affairs began to improve when, afterward pressure from academic and user groups, ISO 8859-2 succeeded as the "Internet standard" with express support of the ascendant vendors' software (today largely replaced by Unicode). With the numerous problems caused by the variety of encodings, even today some users tend to refer to Polish diacritical characters as krzaczki ([ˈkʂät͜ʂ.ki], lit. "little shrubs").

Russian and other Cyrillic alphabets [edit]

Mojibake may exist colloquially called krakozyabry ( кракозя́бры [krɐkɐˈzʲæbrɪ̈]) in Russian, which was and remains complicated by several systems for encoding Cyrillic.^[6] The Soviet Matrimony and early Russian Federation developed KOI encodings ( Kod Obmena Informatsiey , Код Обмена Информацией , which translates to "Code for Information Substitution"). This began with Cyrillic-only 7-bit KOI7, based on ASCII but with Latin and another characters replaced with Cyrillic messages. Then came 8-bit KOI8 encoding that is an ASCII extension which encodes Cyrillic letters only with high-chip fix octets respective to 7-bit codes from KOI7. It is for this reason that KOI8 text, even Russian, remains partially readable after 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 then passed through the loftier fleck stripping process, stop up rendered as "[KOLA RUSSKOGO qZYKA". Somewhen KOI8 gained different flavors for Russian and Bulgarian (KOI8-R), Ukrainian (KOI8-U), Belarusian (KOI8-RU) and even Tajik (KOI8-T).

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

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

Earlier Unicode, it was necessary to match text encoding with a font using the aforementioned encoding system. Failure to do this produced unreadable gibberish whose specific appearance varied depending on the exact combination of text encoding and font encoding. For instance, 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 majuscule letters (KOI8 and codepage 1251 share the same ASCII region, merely KOI8 has uppercase letters in the region where codepage 1251 has lowercase, and vice versa). In general, Cyrillic gibberish is symptomatic of using the wrong Cyrillic font. During the early years of the Russian sector of the World wide web, both KOI8 and codepage 1251 were mutual. As of 2017, one tin can still run across HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, as well every bit Unicode. (An estimated ane.7% 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 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's [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is called đubre ( ђубре ), meaning "trash". Unlike the former USSR, Due south Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Page 1251 was the dominant Cyrillic encoding at that place before Unicode. Therefore, these languages experienced fewer encoding incompatibility troubles than Russian. In the 1980s, Bulgarian computers used their own MIK encoding, which is superficially similar to (although incompatible with) CP866.

Example

Russian example:		Кракозябры ( krakozyabry , garbage characters)
File encoding	Setting in browser	Result
MS-DOS 855	ISO 8859-ane	Æá ÆÖóÞ¢áñ
KOI8-R	ISO 8859-i	ëÒÁËÏÚÑÂÒÙ
UTF-viii	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 messages 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, by and large in foreign names, as well). All of these letters are divers in Latin-2 and Windows-1250, while just some (š, Š, ž, Ž, Đ) exist in the usual Bone-default Windows-1252, and are there because 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, fifty-fifty nowadays, "šđčćž ŠĐČĆŽ" is ofttimes displayed every bit "šðèæž ŠÐÈÆŽ", although ð, è, æ, È, Æ are never used in Slavic languages.

When bars to basic ASCII (nearly user names, for example), common replacements are: š→southward, đ→dj, č→c, ć→c, ž→z (majuscule forms analogously, with Đ→Dj or Đ→DJ depending on word case). All of these replacements innovate ambiguities, so reconstructing the original from such a course is usually washed manually if required.

The Windows-1252 encoding is important considering the English versions of the Windows operating organisation are most widespread, not localized ones.^{[ citation needed ]} The reasons for this include a relatively minor and fragmented market, increasing the toll of high quality localization, a loftier 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 drive to differentiate Croation from Serbian, Bosnian from Croatian and Serbian, and now even Montenegrin from the other three creates many problems. There are many unlike localizations, using dissimilar standards and of different quality. There are no mutual translations for the vast amount of estimator terminology originating in English. In the end, people employ adopted English language words ("kompjuter" for "computer", "kompajlirati" for "compile," etc.), and if they are unaccustomed to the translated terms may not empathize what some option in a carte is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who understand English, also as those who are accustomed to English terminology (who are most, because English terminology is also more often than not taught in schools because 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 similar to other Cyrillic-based scripts.

Newer versions of English Windows allow the code page to be changed (older versions require special English language versions with this support), just this setting can be and often was incorrectly set. For example, Windows 98 and Windows Me can be set to most not-right-to-left single-byte code pages including 1250, but only at install time.

Caucasian languages [edit]

The writing systems of certain languages of the Caucasus region, including the scripts of Georgian and Armenian, may produce mojibake. This problem is particularly astute in the case of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a set of obsolete character encodings for the Armenian alphabet which take 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 not support information technology.

Asian encodings [edit]

Some other type of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such as one of the encodings for East Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more 1 (typically two) characters are corrupted at one time, east.g. "k舐lek" ( kärlek ) in Swedish, where " är " is parsed equally "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 particularly problematic for short words starting with å, ä or ö such as "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since two letters are combined, the mojibake also seems more random (over fifty variants compared to the normal three, not counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an entire text string which happens to include a blueprint of particular give-and-take lengths, such equally the sentence "Bush hid the facts", may exist misinterpreted.

Vietnamese [edit]

In Vietnamese, the miracle is called chữ ma , loạn mã tin occur when estimator try to encode diacritic character divers in Windows-1258, TCVN3 or VNI to UTF-eight. Chữ ma was mutual in Vietnam when user was using Windows XP calculator 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	Trăm northăm trong cõi người ta
TCVN3	UTF-8	Tr¨k n¨m trong câi ngêi ta
VNI (Windows)	UTF-8	Traêm naêchiliad trong coõi ngöôøi ta

Japanese [edit]

In Japanese, the same phenomenon is, as mentioned, called mojibake ( 文字化け ). It is a particular problem in Nippon due to the numerous different encodings that exist for Japanese text. Aslope Unicode encodings like UTF-8 and UTF-16, in that location are other standard encodings, such equally Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, every bit well as beingness encountered past Japanese users, is besides often encountered past 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 i Chinese graphic symbol encoding only is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, it is frequently possible to fix the effect by switching the character encoding without loss of information. The state of affairs is complicated considering of the existence of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the about mutual ones beingness: 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	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 ruddy 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 as characters with the radical 亻, while kanji are other characters. Most of them are extremely uncommon and not in practical use in mod Chinese.
EUC-KR	GB	叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨	디제이맥스 테크니카	Random common Simplified Chinese characters which in most cases brand no sense. Easily identifiable considering of spaces betwixt 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 place names. Examples of this are Taiwanese politicians Wang Chien-shien (Chinese: 王建煊; pinyin: Wáng Jiànxuān )'s "煊", Yu Shyi-kun (simplified Chinese: 游锡堃; traditional Chinese: 游錫堃; pinyin: Yóu Xíkūn )'s "堃" and vocalist David Tao (Chinese: 陶喆; pinyin: Táo Zhé )'s "喆" missing in Big5, ex-PRC Premier Zhu Rongji (Chinese: 朱镕基; pinyin: Zhū Róngjī )'s "镕" missing in GB2312, copyright symbol "©" missing in GBK.^[ix]

Newspapers take dealt with this trouble in various means, including using software to combine ii existing, similar characters; using a film 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 event can 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 because, in many Indic scripts, the rules by which individual letter symbols combine to create symbols for syllables may not be properly understood by a computer missing the advisable software, even if the glyphs for the private letter forms are bachelor.

One example of this is the old Wikipedia logo, which attempts to show the grapheme analogous to "wi" (the first syllable of "Wikipedia") on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle piece meant to comport the Devanagari grapheme for "wi" instead used to display the "wa" character followed past an unpaired "i" modifier vowel, easily recognizable equally 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 Bone for Singhala and it makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters (syllables) beyond all operating systems. For instance, the 'reph', the short grade for 'r' is a diacritic that normally goes on top of a plain letter of the alphabet. However, it is incorrect to proceed top of some letters similar 'ya' or 'la' in specific contexts. For Sanskritic words or names inherited by modern languages, such equally कार्य, IAST: kārya, or आर्या, IAST: āryā, it is apt to put information technology on top of these messages. By contrast, for like sounds in modern languages which result from their specific rules, it is not put on summit, such as the discussion करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stem form of the common give-and-take करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marāthi language.^[eleven] But information technology happens in well-nigh operating systems. This appears to be a fault of internal programming of the fonts. In Mac Os and iOS, the muurdhaja l (dark l) and 'u' combination and its long form both yield wrong shapes.^{[ citation needed ]}

Some Indic and Indic-derived scripts, near notably Lao, were non officially supported by Windows XP until the release of Vista.^[12] However, various sites accept made free-to-download fonts.

Burmese [edit]

Due to Western sanctions^[13] and the late inflow of Burmese language support in computers,^{[14] [15]} much of the early Burmese localization was homegrown without international cooperation. The prevailing means of Burmese support is via the Zawgyi font, a font that was created as a Unicode font but was in fact simply partially Unicode compliant.^[15] In the Zawgyi font, some codepoints for Burmese script were implemented as specified in Unicode, but others were non.^[16] The Unicode Consortium refers to this as ad hoc font encodings.^[17] With the appearance of mobile phones, mobile vendors such every bit Samsung and Huawei simply replaced the Unicode compliant arrangement 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 outcome, content producers would make posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.^[18] Myanmar government has designated 1 October 2019 as "U-Twenty-four hours" to officially switch to Unicode.^[13] The total transition is estimated to take two years.^[19]

African languages [edit]

In certain writing systems of Africa, unencoded text is unreadable. Texts that may produce mojibake include those from the Horn of Africa such every bit the Ge'ez script in Federal democratic republic of ethiopia and Eritrea, used for Amharic, Tigre, and other languages, and the Somali language, which employs the Osmanya alphabet. In Southern Africa, the Mwangwego alphabet is used to write languages of Malawi and the Mandombe alphabet was created for the Autonomous Republic of the congo, but these are not generally supported. Diverse other writing systems native to West Africa nowadays similar problems, such every bit the N'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Liberia.

Arabic [edit]

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

Examples [edit]

File encoding	Setting in browser	Upshot
Standard 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-v	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 practice not have UTF-8 as browser setting, because UTF-8 is easily recognisable, so if a browser supports UTF-eight information technology should recognise it automatically, and non effort to interpret something else as UTF-eight.

Run into likewise [edit]

• Code bespeak
• Replacement graphic symbol
• Substitute character
• Newline – The conventions for representing the line break differ betwixt Windows and Unix systems. Though near software supports both conventions (which is trivial), software that must preserve or display the difference (e.m. version control systems and data comparison tools) can get substantially more than difficult to utilise if not adhering to 1 convention.
• Byte club mark – The most in-ring way to store the encoding together with the information – prepend it. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, only will by blueprint be perceived every bit "garbage characters" to incompliant software (including many interpreters).
• HTML entities – An encoding of special characters in HTML, mostly optional, but required for certain characters to escape estimation every bit markup.

  While failure to use this transformation is a vulnerability (run into cross-site scripting), applying it also 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} Rex, Ritchie (2012). "Will unicode soon be the universal code? [The Data]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (7): 60. doi:ten.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
2. ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "curlicue -v linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved 5 October 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-eleven-01 .
5. ^ "sms-scam". June 18, 2014. Retrieved June 19, 2014.
6. ^ p. 141, Command + Alt + Delete: A Lexicon of Cyberslang, Jonathon Keats, World Pequot, 2007, ISBN 1-59921-039-8.
7. ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
8. ^ "Declaring character encodings in HTML".
9. ^ "Prc GBK (XGB)". Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2002-ten-01. Conversion map between 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 up in Myanmar's digital world". The Japan Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved 24 December 2019. Oct. one is "U-Day", when Myanmar officially will prefer the new system.... Microsoft and Apple tree helped other countries standardize years agone, merely Western sanctions meant Myanmar lost out.
14. ^ ^{a b} Hotchkiss, Griffin (March 23, 2016). "Boxing of the fonts". Frontier Myanmar . Retrieved 24 December 2019. With the release of Windows XP service pack ii, circuitous scripts were supported, which made it possible for Windows to render a Unicode-compliant Burmese font such as Myanmar1 (released in 2005). ... Myazedi, Scrap, and later Zawgyi, circumscribed the rendering problem past 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 can be confusing and inefficient, even for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the ii most pop smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated merely past capturing the largest market place share, which means they back up Zawgyi out of the box.
15. ^ ^{a b} Sin, Thant (7 September 2019). "Unified under ane font organization as Myanmar prepares to migrate from Zawgyi to Unicode". Ascension 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 linguistic communication processing
16. ^ "Why Unicode is Needed". Google Code: Zawgyi Project . Retrieved 31 October 2013.
17. ^ "Myanmar Scripts and Languages". Ofttimes Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 24 Dec 2019. "UTF-8" technically does non utilize to ad hoc font encodings such as Zawgyi.
18. ^ LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019). "Integrating autoconversion: Facebook's path from Zawgyi to Unicode - Facebook Engineering". Facebook Applied science. 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 order to improve reach their audiences, content producers in Myanmar ofttimes postal service in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a single post, not to mention English or other languages.
19. ^ Saw Yi Nanda (21 Nov 2019). "Myanmar switch to Unicode to take two years: app programmer". The Myanmar Times . Retrieved 24 December 2019.

External links [edit]

velazquezfanceth.blogspot.com

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

Share this post