Which Graph Can Be Used to Find the Solution(S) to X2 – 4x 4 = 2x – 1 – X2?
Mojibake ( 文字化け ; IPA: [mod͡ʑibake]) is the garbled text that is the result of text being decoded using an unintended graphic symbol encoding.[1] The result is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, often from a dissimilar writing system.
This display may include the generic replacement character ("�") in places where the binary representation is considered invalid. A replacement can as well involve multiple consecutive symbols, as viewed in one encoding, when the same binary code constitutes ane symbol in the other encoding. This is either because of differing constant length encoding (equally in Asian 16-chip encodings vs European 8-bit encodings), or the use of variable length encodings (notably UTF-8 and UTF-xvi).
Failed rendering of glyphs due to either missing fonts or missing glyphs in a font is a different issue that is non to exist confused with mojibake. Symptoms of this failed rendering include blocks with the code signal displayed in hexadecimal or using the generic replacement character. Importantly, these replacements are valid and are the result of correct error handling by the software.
Etymology [edit]
Mojibake ways "character transformation" in Japanese. The discussion is composed 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 data and the notion of its encoding must be preserved. As mojibake is the instance of non-compliance between these, information technology tin can be achieved by manipulating the data itself, or just relabeling it.
Mojibake is often seen with text data that have been tagged with a wrong encoding; it may not fifty-fifty exist tagged at all, only moved between computers with unlike default encodings. A major source of problem are communication protocols that rely on settings on each calculator 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 amongst operating system families, and partly the legacy encodings' specializations for dissimilar writing systems of human languages. Whereas Linux distributions mostly switched to UTF-eight in 2004,[ii] Microsoft Windows generally uses UTF-sixteen, and sometimes uses viii-bit code pages for text files in dissimilar languages.[ dubious ]
For some writing systems, an example being Japanese, several encodings have historically been employed, causing users to run into mojibake relatively often. Every bit a Japanese example, the give-and-take mojibake "文字化け" stored as EUC-JP might be incorrectly displayed as "ﾊｸｻ�ｽ､ｱ", "ﾊｸｻ嵂ｽ､ｱ" (MS-932), or "ﾊｸｻ郾ｽ､ｱ" (Shift JIS-2004). The same text stored as UTF-8 is displayed every bit "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 "æ–‡å—化ã'" in software that assumes text to exist in the Windows-1252 or ISO-8859-1 encodings, ordinarily labelled Western, or (for example) as "鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼" if interpreted every bit being in a GBK (Mainland China) locale.
| Original text | 文 | 字 | 化 | け | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw bytes of EUC-JP encoding | CA | B8 | BB | FA | B2 | BD | A4 | B1 |
| Bytes interpreted every bit Shift-JIS encoding | ﾊ | ｸ | ｻ | 郾 | ｽ | ､ | ｱ | |
| Bytes interpreted as ISO-8859-one encoding | Ê | ¸ | » | ú | ² | ½ | ¤ | ± |
| Bytes interpreted equally GBK encoding | 矢 | 机 | 步 | け | ||||
Underspecification [edit]
If the encoding is not specified, information technology is up to the software to decide information technology 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-then-uncommon scenarios.
The encoding of text files is afflicted by locale setting, which depends on the user's language, brand of operating organisation and perhaps other conditions. Therefore, the assumed encoding is systematically wrong for files that come from a computer with a different setting, or even from a differently localized software within the same system. For Unicode, 1 solution is to utilise a byte order mark, but for source code and other car readable text, many parsers don't tolerate this. Some other is storing the encoding as metadata in the file system. File systems that support extended file attributes tin can store this as user.charset.[3] This also requires back up in software that wants to take advantage of information technology, simply does not disturb other software.
While a few encodings are easy to detect, in particular UTF-8, in that location are many that are hard to distinguish (meet charset detection). A spider 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's meta tags that are used to substitute for missing HTTP headers if the server cannot be configured to send the proper HTTP headers; come across character encodings in HTML.
Mis-specification [edit]
Mojibake likewise occurs when the encoding is wrongly specified. This oft happens betwixt encodings that are like. For example, the Eudora e-mail client for Windows was known to ship emails labelled every bit ISO-8859-one that were in reality Windows-1252.[4] The Mac Os version of Eudora did non exhibit this behaviour. Windows-1252 contains extra printable characters in the C1 range (the most frequently seen being curved quotation marks and extra dashes), that were not displayed properly in software complying with the ISO standard; this especially affected software running under other operating systems such as Unix.
Human ignorance [edit]
Of the encodings nevertheless in use, many are partially compatible with each other, with ASCII as the predominant common subset. This sets the stage for man ignorance:
- Compatibility can be a deceptive holding, 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 actually use as "ASCII". Maybe for simplification, but even in academic literature, the give-and-take "ASCII" can be found used as an example of something not compatible with Unicode, where evidently "ASCII" is Windows-1252 and "Unicode" is UTF-eight.[1] Annotation that UTF-viii 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 exist misleading to the recipient. For example, consider a web server serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The character prepare may be communicated to the client in any number of 3 ways:
- in the HTTP header. This information tin can be based on server configuration (for example, when serving a file off disk) or controlled past the application running on the server (for dynamic websites).
- in the file, every bit an HTML meta tag (
http-equivorcharset) or theencodingattribute of an XML declaration. This is the encoding that the writer meant to save the item file in. - in the file, as a byte order mark. This is the encoding that the writer'south editor actually saved information technology in. Unless an adventitious encoding conversion has happened (by opening it in one encoding and saving information technology in another), this will exist correct. It is, all the same, only available in Unicode encodings such equally UTF-8 or UTF-16.
Lack of hardware or software support [edit]
Much older hardware is typically designed to support merely i character set and the character set up typically cannot be contradistinct. 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 tabular array differs from country to country. As such, these systems volition potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a system from a different state. Likewise, many early operating systems do not support multiple encoding formats and thus will stop up displaying mojibake if made to brandish non-standard text—early versions of Microsoft Windows and Palm Os for case, are localized on a per-country basis and volition only support encoding standards relevant to the country the localized version will be sold in, and will brandish mojibake if a file containing a text in a unlike encoding format from the version that the OS is designed to support is opened.
Resolutions [edit]
Applications using UTF-eight as a default encoding may achieve a greater degree of interoperability considering of its widespread utilize and backward compatibility with US-ASCII. UTF-8 also has the ability to be directly recognised past a simple algorithm, and so that well written software should exist able to avert mixing UTF-8 upward 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 it. Two of the most common applications in which mojibake may occur are web browsers and word processors. Mod browsers and word processors often support a broad array of character encodings. Browsers often permit a user to change their rendering engine's encoding setting on the fly, while word processors allow the user to select the appropriate encoding when opening a file. It may take some trial and error for users to find the correct encoding.
The problem gets more than complicated when it occurs in an awarding that unremarkably does non support a wide range of character encoding, such every bit in a not-Unicode computer game. In this example, the user must alter the operating system's encoding settings to lucifer that of the game. Yet, irresolute the system-wide encoding settings can also cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In Windows XP or later, a user too has the option to utilise Microsoft AppLocale, an application that allows the changing of per-application locale settings. Even so, changing the operating organization encoding settings is not possible on before operating systems such as Windows 98; to resolve this issue on earlier operating systems, a user would have to apply third political party font rendering applications.
Problems in different writing systems [edit]
English [edit]
Mojibake in English texts mostly occurs in punctuation, such every bit em dashes (—), en dashes (–), and curly quotes (",",','), merely rarely in character text, since most encodings concur with ASCII on the encoding of the English language alphabet. For case, the pound sign "£" volition announced equally "£" if it was encoded by the sender as UTF-8 but interpreted by the recipient as CP1252 or ISO 8859-1. If iterated using CP1252, this can lead to "£", "£", "ÃÆ'‚£", etc.
Some computers did, in older eras, have vendor-specific encodings which caused mismatch likewise for English text. Commodore brand 8-scrap 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, but flipped the case of all letters. IBM mainframes utilise 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 but mildly unreadable with mojibake:
- å, ä, ö in Finnish and Swedish
- à, ç, è, é, ï, í, ò, ó, ú, ü in Catalan
- æ, ø, å in Norwegian and Danish
- á, é, ó, ij, è, ë, ï in Dutch
- ä, ö, ü, and ß in German
- 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 capital counterparts, if applicable.
These are languages for which the ISO-8859-one grapheme gear up (also known every bit Latin i or Western) has been in use. However, ISO-8859-1 has been obsoleted past two competing standards, the backward compatible Windows-1252, and the slightly altered ISO-8859-15. Both add together the Euro sign € and the French œ, but otherwise any confusion of these iii grapheme sets does not create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is always safe to interpret ISO-8859-one as Windows-1252, and fairly safe to interpret it equally ISO-8859-15, in particular with respect to the Euro sign, which replaces the rarely used currency sign (¤). However, with the advent of UTF-8, mojibake has become more mutual in certain scenarios, e.g. exchange of text files betwixt UNIX and Windows computers, due to UTF-8's incompatibility with Latin-1 and Windows-1252. But UTF-viii has the ability to be directly recognised past a simple algorithm, so that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-8 up with other encodings, so this was most common when many had software not supporting UTF-8. Most of these languages were supported by MS-DOS default CP437 and other machine default encodings, except ASCII, and then issues when buying an operating system version were less common. Windows and MS-DOS are not compatible however.
In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and German, vowels are rarely repeated, and information technology is usually obvious when one character gets corrupted, e.k. the second alphabetic character in "kärlek" ( kärlek , "love"). This way, even though the reader has to guess between å, ä and ö, nigh all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other mitt, does feature repeating vowels in words similar hääyö ("wedding night") which can sometimes render text very difficult to read (e.m. hääyö appears as "hääyö"). Icelandic and Faeroese accept 10 and eight possibly confounding characters, respectively, which thus can go far more difficult to guess corrupted characters; Icelandic words similar þjóðlöð ("outstanding hospitality") become almost entirely unintelligible when rendered as "þjóðlöð".
In German, Buchstabensalat ("letter salad") is a mutual term for this miracle, and in Spanish, deformación (literally deformation).
Some users transliterate their writing when using a computer, either by omitting the problematic diacritics, or 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 German when umlauts are not available. The latter practice seems to be amend tolerated in the German sphere than in the Nordic countries. For case, 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 example, the Norwegian football game actor Ole Gunnar Solskjær had his name spelled "SOLSKJAER" on his back when he played for Manchester United.
An artifact of UTF-8 misinterpreted as ISO-8859-1, "Ring million nÃ¥" (" Ring meg nå "), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Norway in June 2014.[five]
| Swedish example: | Smörgås (open up sandwich) | |
|---|---|---|
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Result |
| MS-DOS 437 | ISO 8859-ane | Sm"rg†southward |
| ISO 8859-i | Mac Roman | SmˆrgÂs |
| UTF-8 | ISO 8859-ane | Smörgås |
| UTF-8 | Mac Roman | Smörgås |
Central and Eastern European [edit]
Users of Key and Eastern European languages can also be affected. Because well-nigh computers were not connected to whatever network during the mid- to late-1980s, there were different character encodings for every language with diacritical characters (come across ISO/IEC 8859 and KOI-8), often also varying by operating arrangement.
Hungarian [edit]
Hungarian is another afflicted linguistic communication, which uses the 26 bones English characters, plus the accented forms á, é, í, ó, ú, ö, ü (all present in the Latin-1 character prepare), plus the two characters ő and ű, which are not in Latin-1. These 2 characters can be correctly encoded in Latin-two, Windows-1250 and Unicode. Before Unicode became common in e-mail clients, due east-mails containing Hungarian text often had the letters ő and ű corrupted, sometimes to the betoken of unrecognizability. It is common to reply to an email rendered unreadable (encounter examples below) by character mangling (referred to as "betűszemét", significant "letter of the alphabet garbage") with the phrase "Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép", a nonsense phrase (literally "Flood-resistant mirror-drilling machine") containing all absolute characters used in Hungarian.
Examples [edit]
| Source encoding | Target encoding | Result | Occurrence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hungarian example | ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép | Characters in red are wrong and practice not 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; however, the operating system, a software or printer used the default CP 437 encoding. Please annotation that pocket-size-case letters are mainly correct, exception with ő (ï) and ű (√). Ü/ü is correct because CP 852 was made compatible with German language. Nowadays occurs mainly on printed prescriptions and cheques. |
| CWI-2 | CP 437 | ÅRVìZTÿRº TÜKÖRFùRòGÉP árvíztûrô tükörfúrógép | The CWI-2 encoding was designed so that the text remains 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, 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. Only ő-Ő (õ-Õ) and ű-Ű (û-Û) are wrong, just the text is completely readable. This is the most common error nowadays; due to ignorance, it occurs frequently on webpages or fifty-fifty in printed media. |
| CP 852 | Windows-1250 | µRVÖZTëRŠ TšK™RFéRŕYard P rvˇztűr‹ t k"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▄MÍRF┌RËG╔P ßrvÝztűr§ tŘk÷rf˙rˇyardÚp | Central European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The use of ű is right. |
| Quoted-printable | 7-chip ASCII | =C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5 T=DCK=D6RF=DAR=D3Thou=C9P =E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5 t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F31000=E9p | Mainly acquired by wrongly configured mail servers just may occur in SMS messages on some prison cell-phones too. |
| UTF-viii | Windows-1252 | ÃRVÃZTÅ°RÅ TÃœKÖRFÚRÃ"GÉP árvÃztűrÅ' tükörfúrógép | Mainly caused past wrongly configured spider web services or webmail clients, which were non tested for international usage (as the trouble remains curtained for English texts). In this case the actual (often generated) content is in UTF-viii; however, information technology is not 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 character encodings such as AmigaPL on Amiga, Atari Society 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 meliorate when, after pressure level from academic and user groups, ISO 8859-2 succeeded as the "Internet standard" with limited support of the dominant vendors' software (today largely replaced by Unicode). With the numerous problems caused past the variety of encodings, even today some users tend to refer to Polish diacritical characters as krzaczki ([kshach-kih], lit. "niggling shrubs").
Russian and other Cyrillic alphabets [edit]
Mojibake may be colloquially called krakozyabry ( кракозя́бры [krɐkɐˈzʲæbrɪ̈]) in Russian, which was and remains complicated by several systems for encoding Cyrillic.[6] The Soviet Union and early on Russian Federation developed 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 simply with Latin and some other characters replaced with Cyrillic messages. And so came 8-scrap KOI8 encoding that is an ASCII extension which encodes Cyrillic messages just with high-bit set octets respective to seven-flake 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 so passed through the loftier 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 even Tajik (KOI8-T).
Meanwhile, in the W, Code page 866 supported Ukrainian and Belarusan every bit well as 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 lawmaking points for practically all the characters of all the world'southward languages, including all Cyrillic characters.
Before Unicode, it was necessary to lucifer text encoding with a font using the same encoding organisation. 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 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 generally of capital letter letters (KOI8 and codepage 1251 share the same ASCII region, merely 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 common. Equally of 2017, one tin notwithstanding encounter HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, too as Unicode. (An estimated 1.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 web page in its source,[viii] this is sometimes neglected, forcing the user to switch encodings in the browser manually.
In Bulgarian, mojibake is often called majmunica ( маймуница ), meaning "monkey'due south [alphabet]". In Serbian, it is chosen đubre ( ђубре ), meaning "trash". Different the one-time USSR, South Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Page 1251 was the dominant 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.
| Russian case: | Кракозябры ( krakozyabry , garbage characters) | |
|---|---|---|
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Result |
| MS-DOS 855 | ISO 8859-one | Æá ÆÖóÞ¢áñ |
| KOI8-R | ISO 8859-1 | ëÒÁËÏÚÑÂÒÙ |
| UTF-viii | KOI8-R | п я─п╟п╨п╬п╥я▐п╠я─я▀ |
Yugoslav languages [edit]
Croatian, Bosnian, Serbian (the dialects of the Yugoslav Serbo-Croatian linguistic communication) and Slovenian add to the basic Latin alphabet the messages š, đ, č, ć, ž, and their majuscule counterparts Š, Đ, Č, Ć, Ž (merely č/Č, š/Š and ž/Ž in Slovenian; officially, although others are used when needed, generally in foreign names, too). All of these letters are defined in Latin-2 and Windows-1250, while only some (š, Š, ž, Ž, Đ) exist in the usual Bone-default Windows-1252, and are there because of some other languages.
Although Mojibake tin occur with whatsoever of these characters, the letters that are not included in Windows-1252 are much more prone to errors. Thus, even nowadays, "šđčćž ŠĐČĆŽ" is often displayed as "šðèæž ŠÐÈÆŽ", although ð, è, æ, È, Æ are never used in Slavic languages.
When confined to basic ASCII (almost user names, for example), mutual replacements are: š→s, đ→dj, č→c, ć→c, ž→z (capital letter forms analogously, with Đ→Dj or Đ→DJ depending on word case). All of these replacements introduce ambiguities, and so reconstructing the original from such a form is usually washed manually if required.
The Windows-1252 encoding is of import because the English versions of the Windows operating system are nigh widespread, not localized ones.[ commendation needed ] The reasons for this include a relatively modest and fragmented market, increasing the toll of high quality localization, a loftier degree of software piracy (in turn caused by high toll of software compared to income), which discourages localization efforts, and people preferring English versions of Windows and other software.[ commendation needed ]
The drive to differentiate Croatian from Serbian, Bosnian from Croatian and Serbian, and now even Montenegrin from the other three creates many issues. At that place are many unlike localizations, using different standards and of different quality. At that place are no common translations for the vast amount of computer terminology originating in English. In the end, people use adopted English words ("kompjuter" for "computer", "kompajlirati" for "compile," etc.), and if they are unaccustomed to the translated terms may not sympathize what some option in a menu is supposed to exercise based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who understand English, besides as those who are accustomed to English terminology (who are about, because English terminology is also more often than not taught in schools because of these problems) regularly choose 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 language Windows allow the code folio to be inverse (older versions require special English language versions with this back up), but this setting tin can be and oft was incorrectly ready. For case, Windows 98 and Windows Me tin can be fix to nigh non-right-to-left single-byte code pages including 1250, merely 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 acute in the case of ArmSCII or ARMSCII, a fix 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 support in the calculator industry. For case, Microsoft Windows does not support information technology.
Asian encodings [edit]
Another type of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such as ane of the encodings for Eastward Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more than 1 (typically ii) characters are corrupted at in one case, 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 letters unrelated to the problematic å, ä or ö are missing, and is specially problematic for short words starting with å, ä or ö such as "än" (which becomes "舅"). Since two letters are combined, the mojibake likewise seems more random (over fifty variants compared to the normal three, non counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an entire text string which happens to include a pattern of detail give-and-take lengths, such as the sentence "Bush hid the facts", may be misinterpreted.
Japanese [edit]
In Japanese, the miracle is, as mentioned, called mojibake ( 文字化け ). It is a particular problem in Nihon due to the numerous unlike encodings that exist for Japanese text. Alongside Unicode encodings similar UTF-eight and UTF-16, there are other standard encodings, such as Shift-JIS (Windows machines) and EUC-JP (UNIX systems). Mojibake, as well equally being encountered past Japanese users, is besides ofttimes encountered by not-Japanese when attempting to run software written for the Japanese market place.
Chinese [edit]
In Chinese, the same phenomenon is chosen Luàn mǎ (Pinyin, Simplified Chinese 乱码 , Traditional Chinese 亂碼 , meaning 'cluttered code'), and can occur when computerised text is encoded in one Chinese graphic symbol encoding merely is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, it is often possible to fix the issue by switching the character encoding without loss of data. The state of affairs is complicated because of the existence of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the most common ones existence: Unicode, Big5, and Guobiao (with several astern uniform versions), and the possibility of Chinese characters being encoded using Japanese encoding.
Information technology is like shooting fish in a barrel to place the original encoding when luanma occurs in Guobiao encodings:
| Original encoding | Viewed as | Result | Original text | Notation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big5 | GB | ?T瓣в变巨肚 | 三國志曹操傳 | Garbled Chinese characters with no hint of original meaning. The cherry-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. Nigh of them are extremely uncommon and not in practical apply in mod Chinese. |
| EUC-KR | GB | 叼力捞钙胶 抛农聪墨 | 디제이맥스 테크니카 | Random mutual Simplified Chinese characters which in nearly cases make no sense. Hands identifiable considering 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 )'due south "煊", Yu Shyi-kun (simplified Chinese: 游锡堃; traditional Chinese: 游錫堃; pinyin: Yóu Xíkūn )'s "堃" and vocalizer David Tao (Chinese: 陶喆; pinyin: Táo Zhé )'s "喆" missing in Big5, ex-PRC Premier Zhu Rongji (Chinese: 朱镕基; pinyin: Zhū Róngjī )'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 show of the personality; or but substituting a homophone for the rare character in the hope that the reader would exist able to make the right inference.
Indic text [edit]
A similar consequence can occur in Brahmic or Indic scripts of Southern asia, used in such Indo-Aryan or Indic languages as Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu), Bengali, Punjabi, Marāthi, and others, even if the character set up employed is properly recognized past the application. This is considering, in many Indic scripts, the rules past which individual letter symbols combine to create symbols for syllables may not be properly understood past a estimator missing the appropriate software, even if the glyphs for the private alphabetic character forms are available.
1 case of this is the quondam Wikipedia logo, which attempts to show the graphic symbol analogous to "wi" (the first syllable of "Wikipedia") on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle slice meant to comport the Devanagari graphic symbol 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 brandish Indic text.[ten] The logo equally redesigned every bit of May 2010[ref] has fixed these errors.
The idea of Plain Text requires the operating system to provide a font to display Unicode codes. This font is dissimilar from Bone to Bone for Singhala and it makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters (syllables) across all operating systems. For instance, the 'reph', the short class for 'r' is a diacritic that usually goes on top of a plainly letter. Still, information technology is wrong to get on pinnacle of some letters like 'ya' or 'la' in specific contexts. For Sanskritic words or names inherited by modern languages, such every bit कार्य, IAST: kārya, or आर्या, IAST: āryā, information technology is apt to put it on top of these letters. By dissimilarity, for similar sounds in modern languages which result from their specific rules, information technology is not put on top, such as the discussion करणाऱ्या, IAST: karaṇāryā, a stem form of the common word करणारा/री, IAST: karaṇārā/rī, in the Marathi language.[11] 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 (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 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[13] and the late arrival of Burmese linguistic communication support in computers,[14] [15] much of the early Burmese localization was homegrown without international cooperation. The prevailing means of Burmese back up is via the Zawgyi font, a font that was created as a Unicode font just was in fact only partially Unicode compliant.[15] In the Zawgyi font, some codepoints for Burmese script were implemented equally specified in Unicode, but others were not.[16] The Unicode Consortium refers to this as ad hoc font encodings.[17] With the appearance of mobile phones, mobile vendors such as Samsung and Huawei merely replaced the Unicode compliant organization fonts with Zawgyi versions.[14]
Due to these advertizing hoc encodings, communications betwixt users of Zawgyi and Unicode would render equally garbled text. To get around this issue, content producers would make posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.[18] Myanmar government has designated 1 October 2022 as "U-Day" to officially switch to Unicode.[13] The full 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 as the Ge'ez script in Ethiopia and Eritrea, used for Amharic, Tigre, and other languages, and the Somali linguistic communication, which employs the Osmanya alphabet. In Southern Africa, the Mwangwego alphabet is used to write languages of Malawi and the Mandombe alphabet was created for the Democratic Republic of the Congo, merely these are not generally supported. Various other writing systems native to West Africa present like problems, such as the Northward'Ko alphabet, used for Manding languages in Guinea, and the Vai syllabary, used in Republic of liberia.
Standard arabic [edit]
Another affected linguistic communication is Arabic (see below). The text becomes unreadable when the encodings exercise not match.
Examples [edit]
| File encoding | Setting in browser | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Arabic example: |  (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) | |
| Browser rendering: | الإعلان العالمى لحقوق الإنسان | |
| UTF-viii | Windows-1252 | الإعلان العالمى Ù„Øقوق الإنسان |
| KOI8-R | О╩©ь╖ы└ь╔ь╧ы└ь╖ы├ ь╖ы└ь╧ь╖ы└ы┘ы┴ ы└ь╜ы┌ы┬ы┌ ь╖ы└ь╔ы├ьЁь╖ы├ | |
| ISO 8859-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 8859-2 | 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 exercise not have UTF-eight every bit browser setting, because UTF-eight is hands recognisable, and so if a browser supports UTF-8 it should recognise it automatically, and not try to translate something else as UTF-8.
Run into too [edit]
- Code point
- Replacement character
- Substitute grapheme
- Newline – The conventions for representing the line break differ betwixt Windows and Unix systems. Though nearly software supports both conventions (which is trivial), software that must preserve or display the difference (e.m. version control systems and data comparison tools) tin get substantially more hard to utilize if not adhering to one convention.
- Byte social club marker – The about in-ring way to store the encoding together with the data – prepend information technology. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, but volition past design 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 sure characters to escape interpretation every bit markup.
While failure to employ this transformation is a vulnerability (encounter cross-site scripting), applying information technology too many times results in garbling of these characters. For instance, the quotation marking
"becomes",","and so on. - Bush hid the facts
References [edit]
- ^ a b King, Ritchie (2012). "Will unicode presently be the universal code? [The Data]". IEEE Spectrum. 49 (7): lx. doi:ten.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.
- ^ WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004). "scroll -v linux.ars (Internationalization)". Ars Technica . Retrieved 5 October 2018.
- ^ "Guidelines for extended attributes". 2013-05-17. Retrieved 2015-02-15 .
- ^ "Unicode mailinglist on the Eudora email client". 2001-05-xiii. Retrieved 2014-11-01 .
- ^ "sms-scam". June 18, 2014. Retrieved June 19, 2014.
- ^ p. 141, Control + Alt + Delete: A Lexicon of Cyberslang, Jonathon Keats, Earth Pequot, 2007, ISBN 1-59921-039-8.
- ^ "Usage of Windows-1251 for websites".
- ^ "Declaring character encodings in HTML".
- ^ "Prc GBK (XGB)". Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2002-10-01. Conversion map between Lawmaking page 936 and Unicode. Need manually selecting GB18030 or GBK in browser to view it correctly.
- ^ Cohen, Noam (June 25, 2007). "Some Errors Defy Fixes: A Typo in Wikipedia's Logo Fractures the Sanskrit". The New York Times . Retrieved July 17, 2009.
- ^ https://marathi.indiatyping.com/
- ^ "Content Moved (Windows)". Msdn.microsoft.com. Retrieved 2014-02-05 .
- ^ a b "Unicode in, Zawgyi out: Modernity finally catches up in Myanmar's digital world". The Nippon Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
Oct. one is "U-Twenty-four hours", when Myanmar officially volition prefer the new arrangement.... Microsoft and Apple helped other countries standardize years ago, but Western sanctions meant Myanmar lost out.
- ^ 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 two, 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 subsequently Zawgyi, circumscribed the rendering trouble past adding actress code points that were reserved for Myanmar's indigenous languages. Not only does the re-mapping prevent future indigenous linguistic communication support, it likewise results in a typing organisation that tin be disruptive and inefficient, even for experienced users. ... Huawei and Samsung, the ii near popular smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated only past capturing the largest market place share, which means they back up Zawgyi out of the box.
- ^ a b Sin, Thant (7 September 2019). "Unified under one font organisation as Myanmar prepares to migrate from Zawgyi to Unicode". Rising Voices . Retrieved 24 Dec 2019.
Standard Myanmar Unicode fonts were never mainstreamed unlike the private and partially Unicode compliant Zawgyi font. ... Unicode volition improve natural language processing
- ^ "Why Unicode is Needed". Google Code: Zawgyi Project . Retrieved 31 Oct 2013.
- ^ "Myanmar Scripts and Languages". Oftentimes Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 24 December 2019.
"UTF-eight" technically does not utilize to ad hoc font encodings such as Zawgyi.
- ^ LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019). "Integrating autoconversion: Facebook's path from Zawgyi to Unicode - Facebook Technology". Facebook Engineering. Facebook. Retrieved 25 Dec 2019.
It makes advice on digital platforms difficult, as content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. ... In order to better attain their audiences, content producers in Myanmar oft mail in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a unmarried post, non to mention English language or other languages.
- ^ Saw Yi Nanda (21 Nov 2019). "Myanmar switch to Unicode to have ii years: app developer". The Myanmar Times . Retrieved 24 December 2019.
External links [edit]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake
 to X2 – 4x 4 = 2x – 1 – X2?){kind=link}
Post a Comment for "Which Graph Can Be Used to Find the Solution(S) to X2 – 4x 4 = 2x – 1 – X2?"