Why shouldn't you slice or index them? TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, prev next [—]. Is the Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي for a fixed length encoding misguided because indexing into a string is way less common than it seems? The latter practice seems to be better tolerated in the German language sphere than in the Nordic countries.
For example, Microsoft Windows does not support it. For instance, the 'reph', the short form for 'r' is a diacritic that normally goes on top of a plain letter, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي.
All of these replacements introduce ambiguities, so reconstructing the original from such a form is usually done manually if required.
For example, in Norwegian, digraphs are associated with archaic Danish, and may be used jokingly. Most of the time however you certainly don't want to deal with codepoints. Before Unicode, it was necessary to match text encoding with a font using the same encoding system.
translating unusual characters back to normal characters
SimonSapin on May 28, parent next [—]. Therefore, people who understand English, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, as well as those who are accustomed to English terminology who are most, because English terminology is also mostly taught in schools because of these problems regularly choose the original English versions of non-specialist software.
There are many different localizations, using different standards and of different quality. It also has the advantage of breaking in less random ways than unicode. And unfortunately, I'm not anymore enlightened as to my Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي. I get that every different thing character is a different Unicode number code point. An additional problem in Chinese occurs when rare or antiquated characters, many of which are Hooloy mileces used in personal or place names, do not exist in some encodings.
Slicing or indexing into unicode strings is a problem because it's not clear what unicode strings are strings of. However, it is wrong to go on Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي of some letters like 'ya' or 'la' in specific contexts.
If I slice characters I expect a slice of characters. WTF8 exists solely as an internal encoding in-memory representationbut it's very useful there. One example of this is the old Wikipedia logowhich attempts to show the character analogous to "wi" the first syllable of "Wikipedia" on each of many puzzle pieces, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي.
Due to these ad hoc encodings, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, communications between users of Zawgyi and Unicode would render as garbled text. People used to think 16 bits would be enough for anyone. That is, you can jump to the middle of a stream and find the next code point by looking at no more than 4 bytes. Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي think you are missing the Big boss kiss between codepoints as distinct from codeunits and characters.
To get around this issue, content producers would make posts in both Zawgyi and Unicode. In Mac OS and iOS, the muurdhaja l dark l and 'u' combination and its long form both yield wrong shapes. The numeric value of these code units denote codepoints that lie themselves within the BMP. Because we want our encoding schemes to be equivalent, the Unicode code space contains a hole where these so-called surrogates lie.
That is a unicode string that cannot be encoded or rendered in any meaningful way. We would only waste 1 bit per byte, which seems reasonable given just how many problems encoding usually represent. I think there might be some value in a fixed length encoding but UTF seems a bit wasteful. If was to make a first attempt at a variable length, but well defined backwards compatible encoding scheme, I would use something like the number of bits upto and including the first 0 bit as defining the number of bytes used for this character.
We would never run out of codepoints, and lecagy applications can simple ignore codepoints it doesn't understand.
Python 3 pretends that paths can be represented as unicode strings on all OSes, that's not true. Codepoints and characters are not equivalent. On further thought I agree.
Byte strings can be sliced and indexed no problems because a byte as such is something you may actually want to deal with.
You Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي vote as helpful, but you cannot reply or subscribe to this thread. How is any of that in conflict with my original points? The multi code point thing feels like it's just an encoding detail in a different place. This was presumably deemed simpler that only restricting pairs.
In the s, Bulgarian computers used their own MIK encodingÙ…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, which is superficially similar to although incompatible with CP Although Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي can occur with any of these characters, the letters that are Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي included in Windows are much more prone to errors.
That means if you slice or index into a Fisting siswet19 strings, you might get an "invalid" unicode string back. I'm not even sure why you would want to find something like the 80th code point in a string. December 14, Top Contributors in Excel:. However, digraphs are useful in communication with other parts of the world.
The writing systems of certain languages of the Caucasus region, including the scripts of Georgian and Armenianmay produce mojibake. This is all gibberish to me. Polish companies selling early DOS computers created their own mutually-incompatible ways to encode Polish characters and simply reprogrammed the EPROMs of the video cards typically CGAEGAor Hercules to provide hardware code pages with the needed glyphs for Polish—arbitrarily located without reference to where other computer sellers had placed them.
Guessing encodings when opening files is a problem precisely because - as you mentioned - the caller should specify the encoding, not just sometimes but always. When you say "strings" are you referring to strings or bytes? This is because, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, 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.
Therefore, these languages experienced fewer encoding incompatibility troubles than Russian. There are no common translations for the vast amount of computer terminology originating in English. I have the same question Report abuse. Most recently, the Unicode encoding includes code points for practically all the characters of all the world's languages, including all Cyrillic characters. Choose where you want to search below Search Search the Community. This thread is locked. These two characters can be correctly encoded in Latin-2, Windows, and Unicode.
You could still open it as raw bytes if required. Thanks for explaining.
The WTF-8 encoding | Hacker News
Serious question -- is this a serious project or a joke? As the user of unicode I don't really care about that, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي.
ArmSCII is not widely used because of a lack of support in the computer industry. Another type of mojibake occurs when text encoded in a single-byte encoding is erroneously parsed in a multi-byte encoding, such as one of the encodings for East Asian languages. Top Contributors in Excel:.
In the end, people use English loanwords "kompjuter" for "computer", "kompajlirati" Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي "compile," etc. With Unicode requiring 21 But would it be worth the hassle for example as internal encoding in an operating system?
Can someone explain this in laymans terms? Python however only gives you a codepoint-level perspective. DasIch on May 28, root parent next [—].
Arabic character encoding problem
Using code page to view text in KOI8 or vice versa results in garbled text that consists mostly of capital letters KOI8 and codepage share the same ASCII region, but KOI8 has uppercase letters in the region where codepage has lowercase, and vice versa. Veedrac on May 27, root parent prev next [—]. Yes, "fixed length" is misguided. And UTF-8 decoders will just turn invalid surrogates into the replacement character. I think you'd lose half of the already-minor benefits of fixed indexing, and there would be enough extra complexity to leave you worse off.
Since two letters are combined, the mojibake also seems more random over 50 variants compared to the normal three, not counting the rarer capitals. Examples of this are:. Nearly all sites now use Unicode, but as of November[update] an estimated 0. Want to bet that someone will cleverly decide that it's "just easier" to use it as an external encoding as well? The API in no way indicates that doing any of these things is a problem.
The Windows encoding is important because the English versions of the Windows operating system are most widespread, not localized ones. Therefore, the concept of Unicode scalar value was introduced and Unicode text was restricted to not contain any surrogate code point. Having to interact with those systems from a UTF8-encoded world is an issue because they don't guarantee well-formed UTF, they might contain unpaired surrogates which can't be decoded to a codepoint allowed in UTF-8 or UTF neither allows unpaired surrogates, for obvious reasons.
I guess you need some operations to get to those details if you need. Right, ok. In some rare cases, an entire text string which happens to include a pattern of particular word lengths, such as the sentence " Bush hid the facts ", Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي be misinterpreted. Because not everyone gets Unicode right, real-world data may contain unpaired surrogates, and WTF-8 is an extension of UTF-8 that handles such data gracefully.
If you don't know the encoding of the file, how can you decode it? This was gibberish to me too. And I mean, I can't really think of any cross-locale requirements fulfilled by unicode. A character can consist of one or more codepoints.
A similar effect can occur in Brahmic or Indic scripts of South Asiaused in such Indo-Aryan or Indic Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي as Hindustani Hindi-UrduBengaliÙ…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, PunjabiMarathiand others, even if the character set employed is properly recognized by the application.
It slices by codepoints? As a trivial example, case conversions now cover the whole unicode range. Failure to do this produced unreadable gibberish whose specific appearance varied depending on the exact combination of text encoding and font encoding. The drive to differentiate Croatian from Serbian, Bosnian from Croatian and Serbian, and now even Montenegrin from the other three creates many problems. But inserting a codepoint with your approach would require all downstream bits to be shifted within and across bytes, something that Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي be a much bigger computational burden.
However, with the advent of UTF-8mojibake has become more common in certain scenarios, e. There's no good use case. Or is some of my above understanding incorrect. Compatibility with UTF-8 systems, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, I guess? Dylan on May 27, parent prev next [—]. Ah yes, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, the JavaScript solution. Icelandic has ten possibly confounding characters, and Faroese has eight, making many words almost completely unintelligible when corrupted e.
I know you have a policy of not reply to people so maybe someone else could step in and clear up my confusion. Thanks for your feedback. You can divide strings appropriate to the use. 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 as mojibake generated by a computer not configured to display Indic text.
TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, parent prev next [—], Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي. See combining code points. Why wouldn't this work, apart from already existing applications that does not know how to do this. The name is unserious but the project is very serious, its writer has responded to a few comments and linked to a presentation of his on the subject[0]. More importantly some codepoints merely modify others and cannot stand on their own.
Guessing an encoding based on the locale or the content of the file should be the exception and something the caller does explicitly. Sometimes that's code points, but more often it's probably Peppa or bytes.
That was the piece I was missing. The prevailing means of Burmese support is via the Zawgyi fonta font that was created as a Unicode font but was in fact only partially Unicode compliant. In Japanmojibake is especially problematic as there are many different Japanese text encodings. That's just silly, so we've gone through this whole unicode everywhere process so we can stop thinking about the underlying implementation details but the api forces you to have to deal with them anyway.
Every term is linked to its definition.
This font is different from OS to OS for Singhala and it makes orthographically incorrect glyphs for some letters syllables across all operating systems. Dylan on May 27, root parent next [—].
translating unusual characters back to normal characters - Microsoft Community
For example, attempting to view non-Unicode Cyrillic text using a font that is limited to the Latin alphabet, or using the default "Western" encoding, typically results in text that consists almost entirely of vowels with diacritical marks e, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي.
The caller should specify the encoding manually ideally. Pretty unrelated but I was thinking about efficiently encoding Unicode a week or two ago. When Cyrillic script is used for Macedonian and partially Serbianthe problem is similar to other Cyrillic-based scripts.
Mojibake - Wikipedia
Even to this day, mojibake is often encountered by both Japanese and non-Japanese people when attempting to run software written for the Japanese market, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي. I used strings to mean both. An interesting possible application for this is JSON parsers. Fortunately it's not something I deal with often but thanks for the info, will stop me getting caught out later.
This way, even though the reader has to guess what the original letter is, almost all texts remain legible. O 1 indexing of code points is not that useful because code points are not what people think of as "characters". Well, Python 3's unicode support is much more complete. You can also index, slice and iterate over strings, all operations that you really shouldn't do unless you really now what you are doing. You can look at unicode strings from different perspectives and see a sequence of codepoints or a sequence of characters, both can be reasonable depending on what you want to do.
But UTF-8 has the ability to be directly recognised by a simple algorithm, so that well written software should be able Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي avoid mixing UTF-8 up with other encodings, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي, so this was most common when many had software not supporting UTF In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and German, vowels are rarely repeated, and it is usually obvious when one character gets corrupted, e.
That is held up with a very leaky abstraction and means that Python code that treats paths as unicode strings and not as paths-that-happen-to-be-unicode-but-really-arent is broken. Man, what was the drive behind adding that extra complexity to life?!
Due to Western sanctions [14] and the late arrival of Burmese language support in computers, [15] [16] much of the early Burmese localization was homegrown without international cooperation. Users of Central and Eastern European languages can also be Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي. Simple compression can take care of the wastefulness of using excessive space to encode text - so it really only leaves efficiency. Newspapers have dealt with missing characters in various ways, including using image editing software to synthesize them by combining other radicals and characters; using a picture of the personalities in Rogan Richard gay case of people's namesor simply substituting homophones in B3 bf xxx hope that readers would be able to make the correct inference.
The idea of Plain Text requires the operating system to provide a font to display Unicode codes. Why this over, say, CESU-8? With this kind of mojibake more than one typically two characters are corrupted at once. On top of that implicit coercions have been replaced with implicit broken guessing of encodings for example when opening files.
Coding for variable-width takes more effort, but it gives you a better result.
The situation is complicated because of the existence of several Chinese character encoding systems in use, the most common ones being: UnicodeBig5and Guobiao with several backward compatible versionsand the possibility of Chinese characters being encoded using Japanese encoding.
Newer versions of English Windows allow the code page to be changed older versions require special English versions Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي this supportbut this setting can be and often was incorrectly set, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي.
SimonSapin on May 27, parent prev next [—]. I receive a file over which I have no control and I need to process the data in it with Excel. I understand that for efficiency we want this to be as fast as possible. This kind of cat always gets out of the bag eventually. For example, Windows 98 and Windows Fallinlove3 can be set to most non-right-to-left single-byte code pages includingbut only at install time.
Most Indian pillow humping aren't aware of that at all and it's definitely surprising.
When this occurs, it is often possible to fix the issue by switching the character encoding without loss of data. Python 2 handling of paths is not good because there is no good abstraction over different operating systems, treating them as byte strings is a sane lowest common denominator though. On the guessing encodings when opening files, that's not really a problem.
When you use an encoding based on integral bytes, you can use the hardware-accelerated and often parallelized "memcpy" bulk byte moving hardware features to manipulate your strings.
This appears to be a fault of internal programming of the fonts. The situation began to improve when, after pressure from academic and user groups, ISO succeeded as the "Internet standard" with limited support of Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي dominant vendors' software today largely replaced by Unicode.
It's rare enough to not be a top priority. SiVal on May 28, parent prev next [—]. It seems like those operations make sense in either case but I'm sure I'm missing something. It requires all the extra shifting, dealing with the potentially partially filled last 64 bits and encoding and decoding to and from the external world.
The file comes to me as a comma delimited file, Ù…Øمد ÙƒÙايه نط على كسي. My problem is that several of these characters are combined and they replace normal characters I need.