Øâ­ã™â€ž Ù…ã˜â´ã™æ’ã™â€žã˜â© Firmware Upgrade Encountered an Issue Ù„ã˜â§ã˜â¬ã™â€¡ã˜â²ã˜â© Øâ³ã˜â§ã™â€¦ã˜â³ã™ë†ã™â€ Ã˜â¬

Øâ­ã™â€ž Ù…ã˜â´ã™æ’ã™â€žã˜â© Firmware Upgrade Encountered an Issue Ù„ã˜â§ã˜â¬ã™â€¡ã˜â²ã˜â© Øâ³ã˜â§ã™â€¦ã˜â³ã™ë†ã™â€ Ã˜â¬

Garbled text as a result of incorrect character encoding

Mojibake
(Japanese:
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 issue is a systematic replacement of symbols with completely unrelated ones, often from a different
writing organization.

This brandish may include the generic
replacement character
(“�”) in places where the binary representation is considered invalid. A replacement can also involve multiple consecutive symbols, as viewed in one encoding, when the same binary code constitutes one symbol in the other encoding. This is either considering of differing constant length encoding (as in Asian 16-bit encodings vs European viii-chip encodings), or the employ of variable length encodings (notably
UTF-viii
and
UTF-sixteen).

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

Etymology

[
edit
]

Mojibake
means “character transformation” in
Japanese. The word is equanimous of

文字

(moji,
IPA:

[mod͡ʑi]
), “character” and

化け

(bake,
IPA:

[bäke̞]
, pronounced “bah-keh”), “transform”.

Causes

[
edit
]

To correctly reproduce the original text that was encoded, the correspondence betwixt the encoded information and the notion of its encoding must be preserved. As mojibake is the instance of non-compliance betwixt these, it can be achieved by manipulating the information itself, or only relabeling information technology.

Mojibake is frequently seen with text data that have been tagged with a wrong encoding; it may not even be tagged at all, simply moved between computers with different default encodings. A major source of trouble are
advice protocols
that rely on settings on each estimator rather than sending or storing
metadata
together with the data.

The differing default settings between computers are in function due to differing deployments of
Unicode
among
operating system
families, and partly the legacy encodings’ specializations for dissimilar
writing systems
of human languages. Whereas
Linux distributions
more often than not switched to
UTF-8
in 2004,
[ii]

Microsoft Windows
mostly uses UTF-16, and sometimes uses viii-chip code pages for text files in dissimilar languages.[

dubious


]

For some
writing systems, an example being
Japanese, several encodings take historically been employed, causing users to see mojibake relatively often. As a Japanese example, the word
mojibake
“文字化け” stored equally
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 every bit
UTF-8
is displayed as “譁�蟄怜喧縺�” if interpreted as Shift JIS. This is farther exacerbated if other locales are involved: the aforementioned UTF-8 text appears as “文字化け” in software that assumes text to be in the
Windows-1252
or
ISO-8859-1
encodings, commonly labelled Western, or (for example) as “鏂囧瓧鍖栥亼” if interpreted every bit beingness in a
GBK
(Mainland Red china) locale.

Mojibake example
Original text
Raw bytes of EUC-JP encoding CA B8 BB FA B2 BD A4 B1
Bytes interpreted as Shift-JIS encoding
Bytes interpreted equally ISO-8859-1 encoding Ê ¸ » ú ² ½ ¤ ±
Bytes interpreted every bit GBK encoding

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 blazon of software, the typical solution is either configuration or
charset detection
heuristics. Both are prone to mis-prediction in not-and then-uncommon scenarios.

The encoding of
text files
is affected by
locale
setting, which depends on the user’s linguistic communication, brand of
operating organization
and possibly other weather. Therefore, the causeless encoding is systematically wrong for files that come from a calculator with a different setting, or even from a differently
localized
software within the same organization. For Unicode, one solution is to use a
byte social club mark, but for
source code
and other machine readable text, many parsers don’t tolerate this. Another is storing the encoding as metadata in the file arrangement. File systems that back up
extended file attributes
tin can store this equally
user.charset.
[3]

This also requires support in software that wants to take advantage of it, but 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 across
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’due south
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 also occurs when the encoding is wrongly specified. This ofttimes happens between encodings that are like. For case, the
Eudora
email client for
Windows
was known to send emails labelled equally
ISO-8859-one
that were in reality
Windows-1252.
[4]

The Mac OS version of Eudora did not exhibit this behaviour. Windows-1252 contains extra printable characters in the
C1
range (the most frequently seen being curved
quotation marks
and actress
dashes), that were non 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 still in employ, many are partially compatible 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 mutual subset of characters is unaffected by a mixup of 2 encodings (encounter
    Problems in different writing systems).
  • People think they are using ASCII, and tend to label whatever superset of ASCII they actually apply every bit “ASCII”. Perhaps for simplification, but even in academic literature, the word “ASCII” can exist found used as an example of something
    non
    uniform with Unicode, where patently “ASCII” is Windows-1252 and “Unicode” is UTF-8.
    [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 certain data may be misleading to the recipient. For instance, consider a
web server
serving a static HTML file over HTTP. The character set may be communicated to the customer in any number of 3 ways:

  • in the HTTP header. This information tin 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, every bit an
    HTML meta tag
    (http-equiv
    or
    charset) or the
    encoding
    aspect of an
    XML
    announcement. This is the encoding that the writer meant to salvage the particular file in.
  • in the file, as a
    byte order marker. This is the encoding that the writer’s editor actually saved information technology in. Unless an accidental encoding conversion has happened (by opening it in 1 encoding and saving it in another), this will be correct. It is, all the same, merely available in
    Unicode
    encodings such equally UTF-viii or UTF-16.

Lack of hardware or software support

[
edit
]

Much older hardware is typically designed to support only ane character set and the character prepare typically cannot be contradistinct. The grapheme table contained within the display firmware will exist localized to accept characters for the state the device is to be sold in, and typically the tabular array differs from country to land. As such, these systems volition potentially display mojibake when loading text generated on a system from a different country. Likewise, many early operating systems do not back up multiple encoding formats and thus volition end up displaying mojibake if made to display non-standard text—early versions of
Microsoft Windows
and
Palm Bone
for example, are localized on a per-country basis and will only support encoding standards relevant to the country the localized version volition be sold in, and volition display 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-viii
as a default encoding may attain a greater degree of interoperability because of its widespread use and astern compatibility with
Usa-ASCII. UTF-8 also has the power to be straight recognised by a simple algorithm, so that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-eight upward 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
spider web browsers
and
give-and-take processors. Modern browsers and word processors often support a wide array of character encodings. Browsers often allow a user to change their
rendering engine’s
encoding setting on the fly, while give-and-take processors allow the user to select the advisable encoding when opening a file. It may have some
trial and error
for users to detect the correct encoding.

The trouble gets more than complicated when information technology occurs in an application that normally does not support a wide range of character encoding, such as in a not-Unicode computer game. In this case, the user must modify the operating system’s encoding settings to match that of the game. Notwithstanding, changing the organisation-wide encoding settings can as well cause Mojibake in pre-existing applications. In
Windows XP
or afterwards, a user besides has the option to apply
Microsoft AppLocale, an awarding that allows the changing of per-awarding locale settings. Still, changing the operating arrangement encoding settings is not possible on before operating systems such as
Windows 98; to resolve this result on earlier operating systems, a user would take to use 3rd party font rendering applications.

Problems in different writing systems

[
edit
]

English language

[
edit
]

Mojibake in English texts mostly occurs in punctuation, such every bit
em dashes
(—),
en dashes
(–), and
curly quotes
(“,”,‘,’), just rarely in character text, since most encodings agree with
ASCII
on the encoding of the
English language alphabet. For example, the
pound sign
“£” will appear as “£” if information technology was encoded by the sender as
UTF-eight
only interpreted by the recipient as
CP1252
or
ISO 8859-i. If iterated using CP1252, this tin can lead to “£”, “£”, “£”, etc.

Read:  Your Mac Needs a Firmware Update in Order to Install to This Volume Catalina

Some computers did, in older eras, have vendor-specific encodings which caused mismatch also for English text.
Commodore
brand
viii-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, only flipped the case of all messages. IBM mainframes use 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 become corrupted, making texts only mildly unreadable with mojibake:

… and their uppercase counterparts, if applicable.

These are languages for which the
ISO-8859-1
grapheme set (also known every bit
Latin i
or
Western) has been in use. Still, ISO-8859-ane has been obsoleted past two competing standards, the astern uniform
Windows-1252, and the slightly altered
ISO-8859-xv. Both add together the
Euro sign
€ and the French œ, just otherwise whatever defoliation of these 3 character sets does non create mojibake in these languages. Furthermore, it is always safe to interpret ISO-8859-1 as Windows-1252, and adequately prophylactic to translate it every bit ISO-8859-fifteen, 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 mutual in certain scenarios, east.grand. exchange of text files betwixt
UNIX
and
Windows
computers, due to UTF-viii’s incompatibility with Latin-ane and Windows-1252. But UTF-8 has the power to be directly recognised by a simple algorithm, and then that well written software should be able to avoid mixing UTF-8 upward with other encodings, and 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, so issues when buying an operating arrangement version were less common. Windows and MS-DOS are not compatible even so.

In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and German, vowels are rarely repeated, and it is usually obvious when one character gets corrupted, e.g. the second letter in “kÃ⁠¤rlek” (

kärlek

, “love”). This way, fifty-fifty though the reader has to gauge between å, ä and ö, most all texts remain legible. Finnish text, on the other hand, does feature repeating vowels in words like


hääyö


(“nuptials night”) which tin can sometimes render text very hard to read (e.g.


hääyö


appears every bit “hÃ⁠¤Ã⁠¤yÃ⁠¶”). Icelandic and Faroese have x and eight possibly confounding characters, respectively, which thus can make it more than difficult to guess corrupted characters; Icelandic words like


þjóðlöð


(“outstanding hospitality”) become nearly entirely unintelligible when rendered equally “þjóðlöð”.

In German,


Buchstabensalat


(“letter salad”) is a mutual term for this phenomenon, and in Castilian,


deformación


(literally deformation).

Some users transliterate their writing when using a calculator, either by omitting the problematic diacritics, or past using digraph replacements (å → aa, ä/æ → ae, ö/ø → oe, ü → ue etc.). Thus, an author might write “ueber” instead of “über”, which is standard practice in High german when
umlauts
are not available. The latter practice seems to be better tolerated in the German language language sphere than in the
Nordic countries. For example, in Norwegian, digraphs are associated with archaic Danish, and may exist used jokingly. However, digraphs are useful in advice with other parts of the world. As an instance, the Norwegian football thespian
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-one, “Band meg nÃ¥” (“
Ring one thousand thousand nå
“), was seen in an SMS scam raging in Norway in June 2014.
[five]

Examples
Swedish example: Smörgås
(open up sandwich)
File encoding Setting in browser Result
MS-DOS 437 ISO 8859-1 Sm”rg†s
ISO 8859-1 Mac Roman SmˆrgÂs
UTF-8 ISO 8859-1 Smörgåsouth
UTF-8 Mac Roman Smörgås

Central and Eastern European

[
edit
]

Users of
Key
and
Eastern European
languages can also be affected. Considering most computers were not connected to any network during the mid- to belatedly-1980s, there were different character encodings for every language with
diacritical
characters (see
ISO/IEC 8859
and
KOI-viii), often also varying by operating arrangement.

Hungarian

[
edit
]

Hungarian
is another affected language, which uses the 26 basic English language characters, plus the absolute forms á, é, í, ó, ú, ö, ü (all present in the Latin-1 character ready), plus the ii characters
ő
and
ű, which are non in Latin-1. These two 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 indicate of unrecognizability. It is common to reply to an eastward-mail rendered unreadable (see examples beneath) by character mangling (referred to every bit “betűszemét”, pregnant “letter garbage”) with the phrase “Árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép”, a nonsense phrase (literally “Overflowing-resistant mirror-drilling automobile”) containing all accented characters used in Hungarian.

Examples

[
edit
]

Source encoding Target encoding Event Occurrence
Hungarian instance ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜKÖRFÚRÓGÉP
árvíztűrő tükörfúrógép
Characters in red are wrong and do non lucifer the top-left example.
CP 852 CP 437 RVZTδRè
TÜKÖRFΘRαGÉP
árvíztrï
tükörfúrógép
This was very common in
DOS-era when the text was encoded by the Central European
CP 852
encoding; however, the
operating arrangement, a
software
or
printer
used the default
CP 437
encoding. Please notation that small-scale-example messages are mainly correct, exception with ő (ï) and ű (√). Ü/ü is correct because CP 852 was made uniform with German. Nowadays occurs mainly on printed prescriptions and cheques.
CWI-2 CP 437 ÅRVìZTÿRº
TÜKÖRFùRòGÉP
árvíztûrô
tükörfúrógép
The
CWI-two
encoding was designed so that the text remains adequately well-readable even 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 Fundamental-European one. Only 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, it occurs oftentimes on webpages or fifty-fifty in printed media.
CP 852 Windows-1250 µRVÖZTëRŠ
TšOne thousandRFéRŕ
P

rvˇztűr

krfŁr˘gp
Central European Windows encoding is used instead of DOS encoding. The use of ű is correct.
Windows-1250 CP 852 RVZTRŇ
TKÍRFRË1000P
ßrvÝztűr§
tŘk÷rf˙rˇgÚp
Central European DOS encoding is used instead of Windows encoding. The use of ű is correct.
Quoted-printable 7-bit
ASCII
=C1RV=CDZT=DBR=D5
T=DCK=D6RF=DAR=D3G=C9P
=E1rv=EDzt=FBr=F5
t=FCk=F6rf=FAr=F3thousand=E9p
Mainly caused by wrongly configured mail service servers but may occur in
SMS
letters on some cell-phones equally well.
UTF-eight Windows-1252 ÁRVÍZTŰRŐ TÜGrandÖRFÚRÔGÉP
árvÃztűrÅ‘
tükörfúrógép
Mainly acquired by wrongly configured web services or webmail clients, which were non tested for international usage (as the problem remains concealed for English texts). In this case the actual (ofttimes generated) content is in
UTF-viii; however, information technology is not configured in the
HTML
headers, then the rendering engine displays it with the default Western encoding.

Shine

[
edit
]

Prior to the cosmos of
ISO 8859-2
in 1987, users of various computing platforms used their own
character encodings
such every bit
AmigaPL
on Amiga, Atari Guild on Atari ST and Masovia, IBM
CP852,
Mazovia
and
Windows CP1250
on IBM PCs. Polish companies selling early
DOS
computers created their own mutually-incompatible means to encode Smooth 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 Polish—arbitrarily located without reference to where other computer sellers had placed them.

The state of affairs began to improve when, after pressure from bookish and user groups,
ISO 8859-two
succeeded as the “Net standard” with express back up of the ascendant vendors’ software (today largely replaced past 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. “little shrubs”).

Russian and other Cyrillic alphabets



[
edit
]

Mojibake may exist colloquially chosen

krakozyabry

(
кракозя́бры



[krɐkɐˈzʲæbrɪ̈]
) in
Russian, which was and remains complicated past 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-but 7-bit
KOI7, based on
ASCII
just with Latin and some other characters replaced with Cyrillic letters. Then came eight-bit
KOI8
encoding that is an
ASCII extension
which encodes Cyrillic letters only with high-fleck set octets corresponding to vii-fleck codes from KOI7. Information technology is for this reason that KOI8 text, even Russian, remains partially readable after stripping the eighth scrap, which was considered as a major advantage in the age of
8BITMIME-unaware e-mail systems. For example, words “
Школа русского языка


shkola russkogo yazyka
, encoded in KOI8 and so passed through the high bit stripping process, 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).

Read:  How to Install Older Firmware Into Dji Phantom 3

Meanwhile, in the West,
Code page 866
supported
Ukrainian
and
Belarusan
every bit 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.

Earlier Unicode, information technology was necessary to match text encoding with a font using the aforementioned encoding system. Failure to practice this produced unreadable
gibberish
whose specific advent varied depending on the verbal combination of text encoding and font encoding. For example, attempting to view not-Unicode Cyrillic text using a font that is limited to the Latin alphabet, or using the default (“Western”) encoding, typically results in text that consists well-nigh 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 letters (KOI8 and codepage 1251 share the same ASCII region, but KOI8 has uppercase messages in the region where codepage 1251 has lowercase, and vice versa). In general, Cyrillic gibberish is symptomatic of using the wrong Cyrillic font. During the early years of the Russian sector of the World wide web, both KOI8 and codepage 1251 were common. Every bit of 2017, 1 can notwithstanding come across HTML pages in codepage 1251 and, rarely, KOI8 encodings, likewise as Unicode. (An estimated 1.vii% 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 any given web folio in its source,
[8]

this is sometimes neglected, forcing the user to switch encodings in the browser manually.

In
Bulgarian, mojibake is oft called

majmunica

(
маймуница
), meaning “monkey’s [alphabet]”. In
Serbian, it is called

đubre

(
ђубре
), meaning “trash“. Unlike the old USSR, South Slavs never used something like KOI8, and Code Page 1251 was the dominant Cyrillic encoding in that location 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 Issue
MS-DOS 855 ISO 8859-1 Æá ÆÖóÞ¢áñ
KOI8-R ISO 8859-i 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-Croation
language) and
Slovenian
add to the bones Latin alphabet the letters š, đ, č, ć, ž, and their capital counterparts Š, Đ, Č, Ć, Ž (only č/Č, š/Š and ž/Ž in Slovenian; officially, although others are used when needed, mostly in foreign names, likewise). All of these messages are divers in
Latin-2
and
Windows-1250, while just 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 tin occur with any of these characters, the letters that are non included in Windows-1252 are much more decumbent to errors. Thus, even nowadays, “šđčćž ŠĐČĆŽ” is oft displayed as “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→s, đ→dj, č→c, ć→c, ž→z (uppercase forms analogously, with Đ→Dj or Đ→DJ depending on give-and-take example). All of these replacements innovate ambiguities, then reconstructing the original from such a form is usually done manually if required.

The
Windows-1252
encoding is important because the English language versions of the Windows operating system are nigh widespread, non localized ones.[

citation needed

]

The reasons for this include a relatively pocket-size and fragmented market, increasing the toll of high quality localization, a high degree of software piracy (in turn caused by high price of software compared to income), which discourages localization efforts, and people preferring English versions of Windows and other software.[

citation needed

]

The drive to
differentiate
Croation from Serbian, Bosnian from Croatian and Serbian, and at present even
Montenegrin
from the other iii creates many bug. There are many different localizations, using different standards and of different quality. There are no common translations for the vast amount of estimator 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 non understand what some option in a bill of fare is supposed to do based on the translated phrase. Therefore, people who sympathize English, as well as those who are accustomed to English terminology (who are virtually, because English terminology is as well mostly 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 trouble is similar to
other Cyrillic-based scripts.

Newer versions of English Windows allow the
code page
to be changed (older versions require special English versions with this support), but this setting can be and often was incorrectly ready. For instance, Windows 98 and Windows Me tin can be set up to nigh non-right-to-left
unmarried-byte
code pages including 1250, just only at install fourth dimension.

Caucasian languages

[
edit
]

The writing systems of certain
languages of the Caucasus
region, including the scripts of
Georgian
and
Armenian, may produce mojibake. This trouble is particularly astute in the case of
ArmSCII
or ARMSCII, a set of obsolete grapheme encodings for the Armenian alphabet which have been superseded by Unicode standards. ArmSCII is not widely used considering of a lack of support in the computer industry. For example,
Microsoft Windows
does not back up it.

Asian encodings

[
edit
]

Another type of mojibake occurs when text is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such every bit 1 of the encodings for
East Asian languages. With this kind of mojibake more than than one (typically two) characters are corrupted at once, e.grand. “k舐lek” (
kärlek
) in Swedish, where “
är
” is parsed as “舐”. Compared to the in a higher place mojibake, this is harder to read, since letters unrelated to the problematic å, ä or ö are missing, and is especially problematic for short words starting with å, ä or ö such as “än” (which becomes “舅”). Since two messages are combined, the mojibake also seems more than random (over l variants compared to the normal three, not counting the rarer capitals). In some rare cases, an unabridged text string which happens to include a blueprint of particular give-and-take lengths, such equally the sentence “Bush-league hid the facts“, may be misinterpreted.

Vietnamese

[
edit
]

In
Vietnamese, the phenomenon is called

chữ ma
,

loạn mã

can occur when computer try to encode diacritic grapheme defined in
Windows-1258, TCVN3 or VNI to UTF-eight.
Chữ ma
was mutual in Vietnam when user was using Windows XP figurer or using inexpensive mobile telephone.

Example: Trăm năm trong cõi người ta

(
Truyện Kiều
,
Nguyễn Du)
Original encoding Target encoding Effect
Windows-1258 UTF-8 Trăchiliad năk trong cõi người ta
TCVN3 UTF-eight Tr¨m n¨m trong câi ngêi ta
VNI (Windows) UTF-8 Trm nm trong ci ngöôøi ta

Japanese

[
edit
]

In
Japanese, the same miracle is, as mentioned, called
mojibake

(
文字化け
)
. Information technology is a particular problem in Japan due to the numerous different encodings that exist for Japanese text. Alongside Unicode encodings like 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 beingness encountered past Japanese users, is also often encountered by non-Japanese when attempting to run software written for the Japanese market place.

Chinese

[
edit
]

In
Chinese, the same phenomenon is called
Luàn mǎ
(Pinyin,
Simplified Chinese

乱码
,
Traditional Chinese

亂碼
, meaning ‘chaotic code’), and tin can occur when computerised text is encoded in ane
Chinese character encoding
but is displayed using the wrong encoding. When this occurs, information technology is often possible to set the consequence by switching the character encoding without loss of data. The situation is complicated because of the existence of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the most common ones being:
Unicode,
Big5, and
Guobiao
(with several backward compatible versions), and the possibility of Chinese characters existence encoded using Japanese encoding.

It is piece of cake 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 meaning. The red graphic symbol 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 equally 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 most cases make no sense. Hands identifiable because of spaces between every several characters.

An boosted problem is acquired when encodings are missing characters, which is mutual with rare or blowsy characters that are nevertheless used in personal or place names. Examples of this are
Taiwanese
politicians
Wang Chien-shien
(Chinese:
王建煊; pinyin:

Wáng Jiànxuān
)’south “煊”,
Yu Shyi-kun
(simplified Chinese:
游锡堃; traditional Chinese:
游錫堃; pinyin:

Yóu Xíkūn
)’s “堃” and vocalist
David Tao
(Chinese:
陶喆; pinyin:

Táo Zhé
)’s “喆” missing in
Big5, ex-People’s republic of china Premier
Zhu Rongji
(Chinese:
朱镕基; pinyin:

Zhū Róngjī
)’southward “镕” missing in
GB2312,
copyright symbol “©”
missing in
GBK.
[9]

Read:  How to Update Firmware on Pioneer Sp-sb23w Speaker

Newspapers accept dealt with this trouble in various ways, including using software to combine two existing, similar characters; using a picture of the personality; or merely 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 effect can occur in
Brahmic or Indic scripts
of
Southward Asia, used in such
Indo-Aryan or Indic languages
as
Hindustani
(Hindi-Urdu),
Bengali,
Punjabi,
Marathi, and others, even if the character set up 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 appropriate software, even if the glyphs for the individual letter forms are available.

Ane example of this is the onetime
Wikipedia logo, which attempts to show the character analogous to “wi” (the beginning syllable of “Wikipedia”) on each of many puzzle pieces. The puzzle piece meant to bear the
Devanagari
character for “wi” instead used to display the “wa” character followed by an unpaired “i”
modifier
vowel, easily recognizable every bit mojibake generated past a computer non configured to display Indic text.
[10]

The logo equally redesigned as of May 2010
[ref]

has stock-still these errors.

The idea of Plain Text requires the operating system to provide a font to display Unicode codes. This font is different from OS to Bone for Singhala and it makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters (syllables) across all operating systems. For instance, the ‘reph’, the brusk grade for ‘r’ is a diacritic that commonly goes on tiptop of a plain letter of the alphabet. However, information technology is wrong to go on pinnacle of some messages 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, information technology is apt to put information technology on top of these letters. Past contrast, for similar sounds in modern languages which result from their specific rules, it is not put on top, such as the word करणाऱ्या, IAST:
karaṇāryā, a stem course of the mutual word करणारा/री, IAST:
karaṇārā/rī, in the
Marathi linguistic communication.
[eleven]

Just it happens in most operating systems. This appears to exist a error of internal programming of the fonts. In Mac OS and iOS, the muurdhaja 50 (dark l) and ‘u’ combination and its long form both yield wrong shapes.[

citation needed

]

Some Indic and Indic-derived scripts, about notably
Lao, were non officially supported by
Windows XP
until the release of
Vista.
[12]

Yet, various sites accept fabricated free-to-download fonts.

Burmese

[
edit
]

Due to Western sanctions
[xiii]

and the late arrival of Burmese language back up 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
just was in fact but 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 every bit
advertizing hoc font encodings.
[17]

With the appearance of mobile phones, mobile vendors such as Samsung and Huawei only replaced the Unicode compliant system fonts with Zawgyi versions.
[14]

Due to these
ad hoc
encodings, communications between users of Zawgyi and Unicode would return as garbled text. To get effectually this issue, content producers would brand posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode.
[xviii]

Myanmar government has designated 1 October 2019 as “U-Day” to officially switch to Unicode.
[xiii]

The full transition is estimated to accept two years.
[19]

African languages

[
edit
]

In sure
writing systems of Africa, unencoded text is unreadable. Texts that may produce mojibake include those from the
Horn of Africa
such as the
Ge’ez script
in
Ethiopia
and
Eritrea, used for
Amharic,
Tigre, and other languages, and the
Somali language, which employs the
Osmanya alphabet. In
Southern Africa, the
Mwangwego alphabet
is used to write languages of
Malawi
and the
Mandombe alphabet
was created for the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, just these are not generally supported. Various other writing systems native to
Westward Africa
present similar issues, such as the
N’Ko alphabet, used for
Manding languages
in
Guinea, and the
Vai syllabary, used in
Republic of liberia.

Standard arabic

[
edit
]

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

Examples

[
edit
]

File encoding Setting in browser Result
Arabic case:
(Universal Announcement of Human being Rights)
Browser rendering:
الإعلان العالمى لحقوق الإنسان
UTF-8 Windows-1252 الإعلان العالمى لحقوق الإنسان
KOI8-R О╩©ь╖ы└ь╔ь╧ы└ь╖ы├ ь╖ы└ь╧ь╖ы└ы┘ы┴ ы└ь╜ы┌ы┬ы┌ ь╖ы└ь╔ы├ьЁь╖ы├
ISO 8859-5 яЛПиЇй�иЅиЙй�иЇй� иЇй�иЙиЇй�й�й� й�ий�й�й� иЇй�иЅй�иГиЇй�
CP 866 я╗┐╪з┘Д╪е╪╣┘Д╪з┘Ж ╪з┘Д╪╣╪з┘Д┘Е┘Й ┘Д╪н┘В┘И┘В ╪з┘Д╪е┘Ж╪│╪з┘Ж
ISO 8859-6 ُ؛؟ظ�ع�ظ�ظ�ع�ظ�ع� ظ�ع�ظ�ظ�ع�ع�ع� ع�ظع�ع�ع� ظ�ع�ظ�ع�ظ�ظ�ع�
ISO 8859-two اŮ�ŘĽŘšŮ�اŮ� اŮ�ؚاŮ�Ů�Ů� Ů�ŘŮ�Ů�Ů� اŮ�ŘĽŮ�ساŮ�
Windows-1256 Windows-1252 ÇáÅÚáÇä ÇáÚÇáãì áÍÞæÞ ÇáÅäÓÇä

The examples in this commodity exercise not accept UTF-8 as browser setting, because UTF-viii is easily recognisable, so if a browser supports UTF-eight information technology should recognise it automatically, and not try to interpret something else every bit UTF-8.

Encounter also

[
edit
]

  • Lawmaking bespeak
  • Replacement character
  • Substitute character
  • Newline
    – The conventions for representing the line intermission differ between Windows and Unix systems. Though most software supports both conventions (which is picayune), software that must preserve or display the difference (e.chiliad.
    version command systems
    and
    data comparison
    tools) can get substantially more hard to employ if not adhering to i convention.
  • Byte lodge mark
    – The virtually
    in-band
    manner to store the encoding together with the data – prepend information technology. This is by intention invisible to humans using compliant software, simply will by design exist perceived equally “garbage characters” to incompliant software (including many
    interpreters).
  • HTML entities
    – An encoding of special characters in HTML, by and large optional, but required for certain characters to
    escape
    interpretation as markup.

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

  • Bush hid the facts

References

[
edit
]

  1. ^



    a






    b





    Rex, Ritchie (2012). “Will unicode soon be the universal code? [The Data]”.
    IEEE Spectrum.
    49
    (7): 60.
    doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6221090.




  2. ^



    WINDISCHMANN, Stephan (31 March 2004).
    “whorl -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
    2014-11-01
    .




  5. ^




    “sms-scam”. June eighteen, 2014. Retrieved
    June 19,
    2014
    .




  6. ^


    p. 141,
    Control + Alt + Delete: A Dictionary of Cyberslang, Jonathon Keats, Globe Pequot, 2007,
    ISBN1-59921-039-8.


  7. ^




    “Usage of Windows-1251 for websites”.




  8. ^




    “Declaring character encodings in HTML”.




  9. ^




    “PRC GBK (XGB)”.

    Microsoft
    . Archived from
    the original
    on 2002-x-01.


    Conversion map betwixt
    Code page 936
    and Unicode. Need manually selecting
    GB18030
    or GBK in browser to view information technology 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 upward in Myanmar’s digital world”.
    The Japan Times. 27 September 2019. Retrieved
    24 December
    2019
    .
    October. ane is “U-Day”, when Myanmar officially will adopt the new organization…. Microsoft and Apple tree helped other countries standardize years agone, but Western sanctions meant Myanmar lost out.


  14. ^



    a






    b





    Hotchkiss, Griffin (March 23, 2016).
    “Battle of the fonts”.
    Frontier Myanmar
    . Retrieved
    24 December
    2019
    .
    With the release of Windows XP service pack 2, complex scripts were supported, which made information technology possible for Windows to return a Unicode-compliant Burmese font such every bit Myanmar1 (released in 2005). … Myazedi, BIT, and later Zawgyi, circumscribed the rendering problem past adding actress code points that were reserved for Myanmar’s indigenous languages. Not only does the re-mapping prevent future ethnic language support, it besides results in a typing system that can be confusing and inefficient, even for experienced users. … Huawei and Samsung, the two most popular smartphone brands in Myanmar, are motivated only by capturing the largest market share, which means they support Zawgyi out of the box.


  15. ^



    a






    b





    Sin, Thant (7 September 2019).
    “Unified nether one font system as Myanmar prepares to migrate from Zawgyi to Unicode”.
    Rising Voices
    . Retrieved
    24 December
    2019
    .
    Standard Myanmar Unicode fonts were never mainstreamed unlike the private and partially Unicode compliant Zawgyi font. … Unicode will improve natural language processing




  16. ^




    “Why Unicode is Needed”.
    Google Lawmaking: Zawgyi Projection
    . Retrieved
    31 October
    2013
    .




  17. ^




    “Myanmar Scripts and Languages”.
    Oft Asked Questions. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved
    24 December
    2019
    .
    “UTF-8” technically does not apply to advertising hoc font encodings such equally Zawgyi.




  18. ^



    LaGrow, Nick; Pruzan, Miri (September 26, 2019).
    “Integrating autoconversion: Facebook’s path from Zawgyi to Unicode – Facebook Engineering”.
    Facebook Engineering. Facebook. Retrieved
    25 December
    2019
    .
    Information technology makes communication on digital platforms difficult, equally content written in Unicode appears garbled to Zawgyi users and vice versa. … In order to better reach their audiences, content producers in Myanmar often post in both Zawgyi and Unicode in a single post, not to mention English or other languages.




  19. ^



    Saw Yi Nanda (21 November 2019).
    “Myanmar switch to Unicode to accept two years: app developer”.
    The Myanmar Times
    . Retrieved
    24 December
    2019
    .


External links

[
edit
]



Øâ­ã™â€ž Ù…ã˜â´ã™æ’ã™â€žã˜â© Firmware Upgrade Encountered an Issue Ù„ã˜â§ã˜â¬ã™â€¡ã˜â²ã˜â© Øâ³ã˜â§ã™â€¦ã˜â³ã™ë†ã™â€ Ã˜â¬

You May Also Like