An Error Occurred in the Upload. Please Try Again Later. Ñ„ã‘âãâ³ãâºã‘æ’

Garbled text as a consequence of incorrect character encoding

Mojibake ( 文字化け ; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the result of text being decoded using an unintended character encoding.^[ane] The result is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, oftentimes 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 also involve multiple sequent symbols, as viewed in one encoding, when the aforementioned binary code constitutes one symbol in the other encoding. This is either because of differing constant length encoding (as in Asian 16-bit encodings vs European viii-bit 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 issue that is not to be dislocated with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the lawmaking point displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement character. Chiefly, these replacements are valid and are the result of correct error handling by the software.

Etymology [edit]

Mojibake ways "character transformation" in Japanese. The discussion is equanimous of 文字 (moji, IPA: [mod͡ʑi]), "graphic symbol" and 化け (bake, IPA: [bäke̞], pronounced "bah-keh"), "transform".

Causes [edit]

To correctly reproduce the original text that was encoded, the correspondence between the encoded information and the notion of its encoding must be preserved. Every bit mojibake is the instance of non-compliance betwixt these, it can exist accomplished past manipulating the information itself, or just relabeling information technology.

Mojibake is often seen with text information that have been tagged with a incorrect encoding; information technology may non fifty-fifty exist 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 reckoner 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 unlike 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 – talk over ]}

For some writing systems, an example being Japanese, several encodings have historically been employed, causing users to come across mojibake relatively ofttimes. As a Japanese example, the discussion 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 equally UTF-8 is displayed as "譁�蟄怜喧縺�" if interpreted every bit Shift JIS. This is further exacerbated if other locales are involved: the same UTF-8 text appears as "文字化ã'" in software that assumes text to be in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-1 encodings, ordinarily labelled Western, or (for example) as "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted as being in a GBK (Red china) locale.

Mojibake case

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 every bit GBK encoding	矢		机		步		け

Underspecification [edit]

If the encoding is not specified, information technology is up to the software to determine it by 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 not-so-uncommon scenarios.

The encoding of text files is affected by locale setting, which depends on the user's language, brand of operating system and peradventure other conditions. Therefore, the causeless encoding is systematically wrong for files that come up from a computer with a dissimilar setting, or fifty-fifty from a differently localized software within the same organisation. For Unicode, one solution is to utilise a byte social club marking, but for source code and other machine readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Some other is storing the encoding every bit metadata in the file system. File systems that support extended file attributes can store this as user.charset.^[3] This besides requires back up in software that wants to have reward of it, merely does not disturb other software.

While a few encodings are easy to detect, in particular UTF-8, there are many that are hard to distinguish (run into charset detection). A web browser may non be able to distinguish a page coded in EUC-JP and some other in Shift-JIS if the coding scheme is 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 exist configured to send the proper HTTP headers; see character encodings in HTML.

Mis-specification [edit]

Mojibake also occurs when the encoding is wrongly specified. This often happens betwixt encodings that are like. For example, the Eudora electronic mail client for Windows was known to send emails labelled as ISO-8859-1 that were in reality Windows-1252.^[4] The Mac Bone version of Eudora did not exhibit this behaviour. Windows-1252 contains extra printable characters in the C1 range (the most oft 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 nonetheless in use, many are partially uniform with each other, with ASCII as the predominant common subset. This sets the stage for human being ignorance:

• Compatibility tin be a deceptive property, as the common subset of characters is unaffected past a mixup of ii encodings (see Problems in different writing systems).
• People think they are using ASCII, and tend to label whatever superset of ASCII they really use equally "ASCII". Maybe for simplification, just even in academic literature, the give-and-take "ASCII" can exist plant used as an instance of something non compatible with Unicode, where evidently "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-eight.^[1] Note that UTF-8 is backwards uniform with ASCII.

Overspecification [edit]

When at that place are layers of protocols, each trying to specify the encoding based on different data, the least certain information may exist misleading to the recipient. For example, consider a web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The graphic symbol set may be communicated to the client in any number of 3 ways:

• in the HTTP header. This information can be based on server configuration (for case, when serving a file off disk) or controlled by the awarding running on the server (for dynamic websites).
• in the file, equally an HTML meta tag (http-equiv or charset) or the encoding attribute of an XML declaration. This is the encoding that the author meant to save the item file in.
• in the file, every bit a byte order mark. This is the encoding that the author'south editor actually saved it in. Unless an accidental encoding conversion has happened (past opening information technology in ane encoding and saving information technology in another), this volition be correct. It is, however, merely 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 back up only i character set and the character set typically cannot be altered. The character table contained within the display firmware volition exist localized to have characters for the land the device is to be sold in, and typically the table differs from country to state. As such, these systems volition potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a arrangement from a unlike land. Likewise, many early operating systems do not back up multiple encoding formats and thus will cease upwards displaying mojibake if made to display not-standard text—early versions of Microsoft Windows and Palm Bone for instance, are localized on a per-land footing and will simply support encoding standards relevant to the land the localized version will be sold in, and will display mojibake if a file containing a text in a different encoding format from the version that the OS is designed to support is opened.

Resolutions [edit]

Applications using UTF-8 as a default encoding may accomplish a greater degree of interoperability because of its widespread use and backward compatibility with US-ASCII. UTF-8 too has the ability to be straight recognised by a simple algorithm, so that well written software should be able to avert mixing UTF-8 up 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 common applications in which mojibake may occur are web browsers and word processors. Modernistic browsers and word processors oft support a wide array of graphic symbol encodings. Browsers often allow 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. It 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 back up a wide range of graphic symbol encoding, such as in a non-Unicode estimator game. In this case, the user must change the operating system's encoding settings to friction match that of the game. However, changing the organisation-wide encoding settings can besides cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or after, a user also has the option to utilise Microsoft AppLocale, an awarding that allows the changing of per-awarding locale settings. Even and then, changing the operating system encoding settings is not possible on earlier operating systems such equally Windows 98; to resolve this consequence on before operating systems, a user would have to use third party font rendering applications.

Problems in unlike writing systems [edit]

English [edit]

Mojibake in English texts more often than not occurs in punctuation, such equally em dashes (—), en dashes (–), and curly quotes (",",','), just rarely in character text, since most encodings concord with ASCII on the encoding of the English alphabet. For example, the pound sign "£" will announced as "£" if information technology was encoded by the sender as UTF-viii just interpreted by the recipient as CP1252 or ISO 8859-1. If iterated using CP1252, this tin 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-chip 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, only flipped the case of all letters. IBM mainframes use the EBCDIC encoding which does not match 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 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 High german
• á, ð, í, ó, ú, ý, æ, ø in Faeroese
• á, ð, é, í, ó, ú, ý, þ, æ, ö in Icelandic
• à, â, ç, è, é, ë, ê, ï, î, ô, ù, û, ü, ÿ, æ, œ in French
• à, è, é, ì, ò, ù in Italian
• á, é, í, ñ, ó, ú, ü, ¡, ¿ in Spanish
• à, á, â, ã, ç, é, ê, í, ó, ô, õ, ú in Portuguese (ü no longer used)
• á, é, í, ó, ú in Irish
• à, è, ì, ò, ù in Scottish Gaelic
• £ in British English

… and their uppercase counterparts, if applicable.

These are languages for which the ISO-8859-1 graphic symbol ready (also known as Latin one or Western) has been in use. Still, ISO-8859-1 has been obsoleted by 2 competing standards, the backward compatible Windows-1252, and the slightly altered ISO-8859-fifteen. Both add together the Euro sign € and the French œ, but otherwise any defoliation of these three graphic symbol sets does not create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is always safe to interpret ISO-8859-1 every bit Windows-1252, and fairly safe to interpret it as ISO-8859-xv, in particular with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). However, with the appearance of UTF-8, mojibake has go more mutual in certain scenarios, east.grand. exchange of text files between UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-8'due south incompatibility with Latin-1 and Windows-1252. But UTF-8 has the ability to be directly recognised past a uncomplicated algorithm, then that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-eight up with other encodings, so this was nigh mutual when many had software not supporting UTF-8. Nearly 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 it is normally obvious when ane grapheme gets corrupted, e.g. the second letter in "kÃ⁠¤rlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This way, even though the reader has to estimate between å, ä and ö, almost all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other hand, does feature repeating vowels in words like hääyö ("wedding night") which can sometimes render text very difficult to read (e.g. hääyö appears equally "hÃ⁠¤Ã⁠¤yÃ⁠¶"). Icelandic and Faroese have 10 and 8 possibly confounding characters, respectively, which thus can make it more difficult to guess corrupted characters; Icelandic words like þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") get almost entirely unintelligible when rendered as "þjóðlöð".

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

Some users transliterate their writing when using a computer, either past 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 bachelor. The latter do 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. Nonetheless, digraphs are useful in advice with other parts of the earth. Every bit an example, the Norwegian football player Ole Gunnar Solskjær had his proper name spelled "SOLSKJAER" on his back when he played for Manchester United.

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

Examples

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

Central and Eastern European [edit]

Users of Central and Eastern European languages tin can also exist affected. Because most computers were non connected to any network during the mid- to late-1980s, there were different grapheme encodings for every language with diacritical characters (see ISO/IEC 8859 and KOI-8), ofttimes also varying by operating system.

Hungarian [edit]

Hungarian is another affected language, which uses the 26 basic English characters, plus the accented forms á, é, í, ó, ú, ö, ü (all present in the Latin-1 character set), plus the ii characters ő and ű, which are non in Latin-one. These two characters tin can be correctly encoded in Latin-2, Windows-1250 and Unicode. Before Unicode became common in email clients, e-mails containing Hungarian text often had the letters ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the point of unrecognizability. It is common to respond to an due east-mail rendered unreadable (see examples below) past character mangling (referred to every bit "betűszemét", meaning "letter garbage") with the phrase "Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép", a nonsense phrase (literally "Flood-resistant mirror-drilling car") containing all accented characters used in Hungarian.

Examples [edit]

Source encoding	Target encoding	Issue	Occurrence
Hungarian case		ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép	Characters in cherry-red are incorrect and do non match the superlative-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 Primal European CP 852 encoding; however, the operating system, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Delight note that small-case messages are mainly right, 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-two encoding was designed and so that the text remains fairly well-readable fifty-fifty if the display or printer uses the default CP 437 encoding. This encoding was heavily used in the 1980s and early 1990s, but nowadays it is completely deprecated.
Windows-1250	Windows-1252	ÁRVÍZTÛRÕ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztûrõ tükörfúrógép	The default Western Windows encoding is used instead of the Central-European one. Simply ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are wrong, but the text is completely readable. This is the most common error nowadays; due to ignorance, information technology occurs often on webpages or even in printed media.
CP 852	Windows-1250	µRVÖZTëRŠ TšG™RFéRŕG P rvˇztűr‹ t g"rfŁr˘g‚p	Central European Windows encoding is used instead of DOS encoding. The use of ű is correct.
Windows-1250	CP 852	┴RV═ZT█RŇ T▄ChiliadÍRF┌RËThousand╔P ßrvÝztűr§ tŘk÷rf˙rˇ1000Úp	Primal European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The utilize of ű is correct.
Quoted-printable	7-bit ASCII	=C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5 T=DCK=D6RF=DAR=D3K=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCgrand=F6rf=FAr=F3g=E9p	Mainly acquired by wrongly configured mail servers merely may occur in SMS letters on some prison cell-phones also.
UTF-8	Windows-1252	ÁRVÍZTÅ°RŐ TÃœOne thousandÖRFÚRÃ"GÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tüthouörfúróone thousandép	Mainly caused past wrongly configured spider web services or webmail clients, which were not tested for international usage (as the problem remains concealed for English texts). In this example the actual (often generated) content is in UTF-8; all the same, it is non configured in the HTML headers, so the rendering engine displays information technology with the default Western encoding.

Smoothen [edit]

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

The state of affairs began to improve when, subsequently pressure level from academic and user groups, ISO 8859-two succeeded as the "Internet standard" with express back up of the ascendant vendors' software (today largely replaced by Unicode). With the numerous problems caused by the multifariousness 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 exist colloquially chosen krakozyabry ( кракозя́бры [krɐkɐˈzʲæbrɪ̈]) in Russian, which was and remains complicated by several systems for encoding Cyrillic.^[6] The Soviet Union and early Russian Federation adult KOI encodings ( Kod Obmena Informatsiey , Код Обмена Информацией , which translates to "Code for Information Exchange"). This began with Cyrillic-only 7-fleck KOI7, based on ASCII but with Latin and some other characters replaced with Cyrillic messages. Then came viii-bit KOI8 encoding that is an ASCII extension which encodes Cyrillic letters only with high-bit gear up octets corresponding to 7-bit codes from KOI7. It is for this reason that KOI8 text, even Russian, remains partially readable after stripping the 8th bit, which was considered every bit a major advantage in the age of 8BITMIME-unaware email systems. For instance, words " Школа русского языка " shkola russkogo yazyka , encoded in KOI8 and and then passed through the high bit stripping procedure, end up rendered as "[KOLA RUSSKOGO qZYKA". Eventually KOI8 gained different flavors for Russian and Bulgarian (KOI8-R), Ukrainian (KOI8-U), Belarusian (KOI8-RU) and fifty-fifty Tajik (KOI8-T).

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

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

Before Unicode, it was necessary to match text encoding with a font using the same encoding system. Failure to do this produced unreadable gibberish whose specific advent varied depending on the exact combination of text encoding and font encoding. For instance, attempting to view not-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 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 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 on years of the Russian sector of the Earth Wide Spider web, both KOI8 and codepage 1251 were mutual. As of 2017, i can still encounter HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, besides as Unicode. (An estimated ane.vii% of all web pages worldwide – all languages included – are encoded in codepage 1251.^[vii]) Though the HTML standard includes the ability to specify the encoding for whatever given spider web folio 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 ), significant "monkey's [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is chosen đubre ( ђубре ), pregnant "trash". Unlike the erstwhile USSR, South Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Page 1251 was the ascendant Cyrillic encoding at that place earlier 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 8859-1	Æá ÆÖóÞ¢áñ
KOI8-R	ISO 8859-ane	ëÒÁËÏÚÑÂÒÙ
UTF-eight	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 Slovene; officially, although others are used when needed, by and large in foreign names, as well). All of these letters are defined in Latin-2 and Windows-1250, while only some (š, Š, ž, Ž, Đ) exist in the usual OS-default Windows-1252, and are in that location because of some other languages.

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

When confined to basic 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 innovate ambiguities, and so reconstructing the original from such a grade is usually done manually if required.

The Windows-1252 encoding is important considering the English versions of the Windows operating arrangement are most widespread, not localized ones.^{[ citation needed ]} The reasons for this include a relatively small-scale and fragmented marketplace, increasing the price of loftier quality localization, a high degree of software piracy (in turn caused past high toll 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 at present even Montenegrin from the other three creates many problems. There are many different localizations, using unlike standards and of different quality. At that place are no common translations for the vast amount of figurer terminology originating in English. In the end, people utilise adopted English words ("kompjuter" for "figurer", "kompajlirati" for "compile," etc.), and if they are unaccustomed to the translated terms may not understand what some option in a menu is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who understand English, equally well as those who are accepted to English terminology (who are most, because English terminology is also mostly taught in schools because of these issues) regularly choose the original English versions of not-specialist software.

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

Newer versions of English Windows let the code page to exist changed (older versions require special English versions with this support), but this setting can be and often was incorrectly set. For example, Windows 98 and Windows Me can be set to most non-right-to-left unmarried-byte code pages including 1250, but simply 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 peculiarly acute in the case of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a fix of obsolete character encodings for the Armenian alphabet which take been superseded by Unicode standards. ArmSCII is not widely used considering of a lack of support in the computer manufacture. For example, Microsoft Windows does not support it.

Asian encodings [edit]

Another type of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such every bit one of the encodings for Eastward Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more than ane (typically two) characters are corrupted at once, e.g. "k舐lek" ( kärlek ) in Swedish, where " är " is parsed as "舐". Compared to the above mojibake, this is harder to read, since letters unrelated to the problematic å, ä or ö are missing, and is specially problematic for brusque words starting with å, ä or ö such equally "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since two letters are combined, the mojibake besides seems more random (over 50 variants compared to the normal three, not counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an entire text string which happens to include a pattern of particular word lengths, such as the judgement "Bush hid the facts", may be misinterpreted.

Vietnamese [edit]

In Vietnamese, the phenomenon is chosen chữ ma , loạn mã can occur when computer try 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 calculator or using cheap mobile phone.

Case:		Trăm năm trong cõi người ta (Truyện Kiều, Nguyễn Du)
Original encoding	Target encoding	Result
Windows-1258	UTF-eight	Trăm năm trong cõi người ta
TCVN3	UTF-8	Tr¨m n¨m trong câi ngêi ta
VNI (Windows)	UTF-8	Traêm naêchiliad trong coõi ngöôøi ta

Japanese [edit]

In Japanese, the aforementioned phenomenon is, as mentioned, called mojibake ( 文字化け ). It is a item problem in Nihon due to the numerous different encodings that exist for Japanese text. Alongside Unicode encodings like UTF-viii and UTF-sixteen, in that location are other standard encodings, such as Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, equally well as being encountered by Japanese users, is likewise often encountered by non-Japanese when attempting to run software written for the Japanese market.

Chinese [edit]

In Chinese, the aforementioned miracle is called Luàn mǎ (Pinyin, Simplified Chinese 乱码 , Traditional Chinese 亂碼 , meaning 'chaotic code'), and can occur when computerised text is encoded in one Chinese character encoding just is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, it is frequently possible to fix the issue by switching the character encoding without loss of information. The situation is complicated because of the existence of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the well-nigh common ones beingness: Unicode, Big5, and Guobiao (with several astern compatible versions), and the possibility of Chinese characters being encoded using Japanese encoding.

It is piece of cake to place the original encoding when luanma occurs in Guobiao encodings:

Original encoding	Viewed as	Upshot	Original text	Note
Big5	GB	?T瓣в变巨肚	三國志曹操傳	Garbled Chinese characters with no hint of original meaning. The 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 as characters with the radical 亻, while kanji are other characters. Most of them are extremely uncommon and not in practical use in modern Chinese.
EUC-KR	GB	叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨	디제이맥스 테크니카	Random common Simplified Chinese characters which in about cases make no sense. Easily identifiable considering of spaces between every several characters.

An additional trouble 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 )'due south "堃" and singer David Tao (Chinese: 陶喆; pinyin: Táo Zhé )'s "喆" missing in Big5, ex-Cathay Premier Zhu Rongji (Chinese: 朱镕基; pinyin: Zhū Róngjī )'s "镕" missing in GB2312, copyright symbol "©" missing in GBK.^[9]

Newspapers take dealt with this problem in various ways, including using software to combine ii existing, similar characters; using a picture of the personality; or only substituting a homophone for the rare character in the promise that the reader would be able to make the correct inference.

Indic text [edit]

A similar effect tin occur in Brahmic or Indic scripts of Southern asia, used in such Indo-Aryan or Indic languages equally Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu), Bengali, Punjabi, Marathi, and others, even if the character prepare 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 calculator missing the appropriate software, fifty-fifty if the glyphs for the private letter forms are available.

One instance of this is the old Wikipedia logo, which attempts to testify the graphic symbol coordinating to "wi" (the commencement syllable of "Wikipedia") on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle slice meant to comport the Devanagari character for "wi" instead used to display the "wa" character followed by an unpaired "i" modifier vowel, easily recognizable as mojibake generated by a computer not configured to display Indic text.^[x] The logo as redesigned as of May 2010^[ref] has fixed these errors.

The idea of Plain Text requires the operating system to provide a font to brandish Unicode codes. This font is different from Os to Bone for Singhala and it makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters (syllables) across all operating systems. For instance, the 'reph', the short form for 'r' is a diacritic that normally goes on pinnacle of a obviously letter. However, it is wrong to get on top of some messages similar 'ya' or 'la' in specific contexts. For Sanskritic words or names inherited by mod languages, such as कार्य, IAST: kārya, or आर्या, IAST: āryā, it is apt to put it on elevation of these letters. By contrast, for similar sounds in mod languages which effect from their specific rules, information technology is not put on summit, such as the word करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stem grade of the mutual word करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marathi language.^[xi] But it happens in most operating systems. This appears to be a fault of internal programming of the fonts. In Mac Os and iOS, the muurdhaja l (night l) and 'u' combination and its long form 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] All the same, various sites have made free-to-download fonts.

Burmese [edit]

Due to Western sanctions^[thirteen] and the late arrival of Burmese language back up in computers,^{[fourteen] [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 just partially Unicode compliant.^[15] In the Zawgyi font, some codepoints for Burmese script were implemented every bit specified in Unicode, merely others were not.^[xvi] The Unicode Consortium refers to this as ad hoc font encodings.^[17] With the advent of mobile phones, mobile vendors such every bit Samsung and Huawei merely replaced the Unicode compliant organization fonts with Zawgyi versions.^[14]

Due to these advert hoc encodings, communications betwixt users of Zawgyi and Unicode would render as garbled text. To become around this issue, content producers would make posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.^[18] Myanmar government has designated 1 October 2019 as "U-24-hour interval" to officially switch to Unicode.^[13] The full transition is estimated to take 2 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 equally 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 Congo-kinshasa, but these are not more often than not supported. Various other writing systems native to Westward Africa present similar problems, such equally the N'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Republic of guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Liberia.

Arabic [edit]

Another afflicted language is Standard arabic (encounter below). The text becomes unreadable when the encodings exercise not match.

Examples [edit]

File encoding	Setting in browser	Result
Arabic instance:		(Universal Annunciation of Human Rights)
Browser rendering:		الإعلان العالمى لحقوق الإنسان
UTF-viii	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 8859-2	اŮ�ŘĽŘšŮ�اŮ� اŮ�ؚاŮ�Ů�Ů� Ů�ŘŮ�Ů�Ů� اŮ�ŘĽŮ�ساŮ�
Windows-1256	Windows-1252	ÇáÅÚáÇä ÇáÚÇáãì áÍÞæÞ ÇáÅäÓÇä

The examples in this article practise not have UTF-8 as browser setting, because UTF-8 is easily recognisable, and then if a browser supports UTF-8 it should recognise information technology automatically, and not try to translate something else as UTF-viii.

See too [edit]

• Code point
• Replacement graphic symbol
• Substitute grapheme
• Newline – The conventions for representing the line break differ between Windows and Unix systems. Though most software supports both conventions (which is trivial), software that must preserve or display the departure (e.grand. version control systems and information comparison tools) can go substantially more difficult to use if not adhering to one convention.
• Byte order marking – The most in-band way to shop the encoding together with the data – prepend information technology. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, simply will by blueprint be perceived as "garbage characters" to incompliant software (including many interpreters).
• HTML entities – An encoding of special characters in HTML, mostly optional, merely required for certain characters to escape interpretation as markup.

  While failure to apply this transformation is a vulnerability (meet cantankerous-site scripting), applying information technology too many times results in garbling of these characters. For instance, the quotation marker " becomes ", ", " and so on.

• Bush hid the facts

References [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b} King, Ritchie (2012). "Will unicode soon be the universal code? [The Information]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (vii): 60. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
2. ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "curl -v linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved v October 2018.
3. ^ "Guidelines for extended attributes". 2013-05-17. Retrieved 2015-02-fifteen .
4. ^ "Unicode mailinglist on the Eudora email customer". 2001-05-xiii. 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 one-59921-039-eight.
7. ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
8. ^ "Declaring graphic symbol 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'south Logo Fractures the Sanskrit". The New York Times . Retrieved July 17, 2009.
11. ^ https://marä thi.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. ane is "U-Mean solar day", when Myanmar officially will adopt the new arrangement.... 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 ii, circuitous scripts were supported, which made information technology possible for Windows to render a Unicode-compliant Burmese font such as Myanmar1 (released in 2005). ... Myazedi, Bit, and later Zawgyi, circumscribed the rendering trouble by calculation extra code points that were reserved for Myanmar's indigenous languages. Not only does the re-mapping prevent futurity ethnic language support, it also results in a typing system that can be disruptive and inefficient, fifty-fifty for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the 2 nearly popular smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated simply by capturing the largest market place share, which means they support Zawgyi out of the box.
15. ^ ^{a b} Sin, Thant (vii September 2019). "Unified under i font arrangement as Myanmar prepares to migrate from Zawgyi to Unicode". Rising 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 utilize to advertizement hoc font encodings such as 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 December 2019. It makes advice on digital platforms hard, as content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. ... In club to improve accomplish their audiences, content producers in Myanmar ofttimes post in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a single mail, not to mention English 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 Dec 2019.

External links [edit]

harrisprityruccon.blogspot.com

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

Share this post