Related
I am importing .txt file from a remote server and saving it to a database. I use a .Net script for this purpose. I sometimes notice a garbled word/characters (Ullerهkersvنgen) inside the files, which makes a problem while saving to the database.
I want to filter all such characters and convert them to unicode before saving to the database.
Note: I have been through many similar posts but had no luck.
Your help in this context will be highly appreciated.
Thanks.
Assuming your script does know the correct encoding of your text snippet than that should be the regular expression to find all Non-ASCII charactres:
[^\x00-\x7F]+
see here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/20890052/1144966 and https://stackoverflow.com/a/8845398/1144966
Also, the base-R tools package provides two functions to detect non-ASCII characters:
tools::showNonASCII()
tools::showNonASCIIfile()
You need to know or at least guess the character encoding of the data in order to be able to convert it properly. So you should try and find information about the origin and format of the text file and make sure that you read the file properly in your software.
For example, “Ullerهkersvنgen” looks like a Scandinavian name, with Scandinavian letters in it, misinterpreted according to a wrong character encoding assumption or as munged by an incorrect character code conversion. The first Arabic letter in it, “ه”, is U+0647 ARABIC LETTER HEH. In the ISO-8859-6 encoding, it is E7 (hex.); in windows-1256, it is E5. Since Scandinavian text are normally represented in ISO-8859-1 or windows-1252 (when Unicode encodings are not used), it is natural to check what E7 and E5 mean in them: “ç” and “å”. For linguistic reasons, the latter is much more probable here. The second Arabic letter is “ن” U+0646 ARABIC LETTER NOON, which is E4 in windows-1256. And in ISO-8859-1, E4 is “ä”. This makes perfect sense: the word is “Ulleråkersvägen”, a real Swedish street name (in Uppsala, at least).
Thus, the data is probably ISO-8859-1 or windows-1252 (Windows Latin 1) encoded text, incorrectly interpreted as windows-1256 (Windows Arabic). No conversion is needed; you just need to read the data as windows-1252 encoded. (After reading, it can of course be converted to another encoding.)
I am wondering if the newest version of flex supports unicode?
If so, how can use patterns to match Chinese characters?
More:
Use regular expression to match ANY Chinese character in utf-8 encoding
At the moment, flex only generates 8-bit scanners which basically limits you to use UTF-8. So if you have a pattern:
肖晗 { printf ("xiaohan\n"); }
it will work as expected, as the sequence of bytes in the pattern and in the input will be the same. What's more difficult is character classes. If you want to match either the character 肖 or 晗, you can't write:
[肖晗] { printf ("xiaohan/2\n"); }
because this will match each of the six bytes 0xe8, 0x82, 0x96, 0xe6, 0x99 and 0x97, which in practice means that if you supply 肖晗 as the input, the pattern will match six times. So in this simple case, you have to rewrite the pattern to (肖|晗).
For ranges, Hans Aberg has written a tool in Haskell that transforms these into 8-bit patterns:
Unicode> urToRegU8 0 0xFFFF
[\0-\x7F]|[\xC2-\xDF][\x80-\xBF]|(\xE0[\xA0-\xBF]|[\xE1-\xEF][\x80-\xBF])[\x80-\xBF]
Unicode> urToRegU32 0x00010000 0x001FFFFF
\0[\x01-\x1F][\0-\xFF][\0-\xFF]
Unicode> urToRegU32L 0x00010000 0x001FFFFF
[\x01-\x1F][\0-\xFF][\0-\xFF]\0
This isn't pretty, but it should work.
Flex does not support Unicode. However, Flex supports "8 bit clean" binary input. Therefore you can write lexical patterns which match UTF-8. You can use these patterns in specific lexical areas of the input language, for instance identifiers, comments or string literals.
This will work for well for typical programming languages, where you may be able to assert to the users of your implementation that the source language is written in ASCII/UTF-8 (and no other encoding is supported, period).
This approach won't work if your scanner must process text that can be in any encoding. It also won't work (very well) if you need to express lexical rules specifically for Unicode elements. I.e. you need Unicode characters and Unicode regexes in the scanner itself.
The idea is that you can recognize a pattern which includes UTF-8 bytes using a lex rule, (and then perhaps take the yytext, and convert it out of UTF-8 or at least validate it.)
For a working example, see the source code of the TXR language, in particular this file: http://www.kylheku.com/cgit/txr/tree/parser.l
Scroll down to this section:
ASC [\x00-\x7f]
ASCN [\x00-\t\v-\x7f]
U [\x80-\xbf]
U2 [\xc2-\xdf]
U3 [\xe0-\xef]
U4 [\xf0-\xf4]
UANY {ASC}|{U2}{U}|{U3}{U}{U}|{U4}{U}{U}{U}
UANYN {ASCN}|{U2}{U}|{U3}{U}{U}|{U4}{U}{U}{U}
UONLY {U2}{U}|{U3}{U}{U}|{U4}{U}{U}{U}
As you can see, we can define patterns to match ASCII characters as well as UTF-8 start and continuation bytes. UTF-8 is a lexical notation, and this is a lexical analyzer generator, so ... no problem!
Some explanations: The UANY means match any character, single-byte ASCII or multi-byte UTF-8. UANYN means like UANY but no not match the newline. This is useful for tokens that do not break across lines, like say a comment from # to the end of the line, containing international text. UONLY means match only a UTF-8 extended character, not an ASCII one. This is useful for writing a lex rule which needs to exclude certain specific ASCII characters (not just newline) but all extended characters are okay.
DISCLAIMER: Note that the scanner's rules use a function called utf8_dup_from to convert the yytext to wide character strings containing Unicode codepoints. That function is robust; it detects problems like overlong sequences and invalid bytes and properly handles them. I.e. this program is not relying on these lex rules to do the validation and conversion, just to do the basic lexical recognition. These rules will recognize an overlong form (like an ASCII code encoded using several bytes) as valid syntax, but the conversion function will treat them properly. In any case, I don't expect UTF-8 related security issues in the program source code, since you have to trust source code to be running it anyway (but data handled by the program may not be trusted!) If you're writing a scanner for untrusted UTF-8 data, take care!
I am wondering if the newest version of flex supports unicode?
If so, how can use patterns to match Chinese characters?
To match patterns with Chinese characters and other Unicode code points with a Flex-compatible lexical analyzer, you could use the RE/flex lexical analyzer for C++.
RE/flex safely supports the full Unicode standard and accepts UTF-8, UTF-16, and UTF-32 input files without requiring UTF-8 hacks (that can't even support UTF-16/32 input and handle UTF BOM.)
Also, UTF-8 hacks with Flex don't allow you to write Unicode regular expressions such as [肖晗] that are fully supported in RE/flex.
It works seamlessly with Bison to build lexers and parsers.
In fact, with RE/flex we can write any Unicode patterns as UTF-8-based regular expressions in lexer .l specifications, such as:
%option flex unicode
%%
[肖晗] { printf ("xiaohan/2\n"); }
%%
This generates a lexer that scans UTF-8, UTF-16, and UTF-32 files automatically. As per UTF standardization, for UTF-16/32 input a UTF BOM is expected in the input, while an UTF-8 BOM is optional.
We can use global %option unicode to enable Unicode and %option flex to specify Flex specifications. A local modifier (?u:) can be used to restrict Unicode to a single pattern (so everything else is still ASCII/8-bit as in Flex):
%option flex
%%
(?u:[肖晗]) { printf ("xiaohan/2\n"); }
(?u:\p{Han}) { printf ("Han character %s\n", yytext); }
. { printf ("8-bit character %d\n", yytext[0]); }
%%
Option flex enables Flex compatibility, so you can use yytext, yyleng, ECHO, and so on. Without the flex option RE/flex expects Lexer method calls: text() (or str() and wstr() for std::string and std::wstring), size() (or wsize() for wide char length), and echo(). RE/flex method calls are cleaner IMHO, and include wide char operations.
A little encoding puzzle for you.
A comment on a SourceForge tracker item contains the character U+2014, EM DASH, which is rendered by the web interface as — like it should.
In the XML export, however, it shows up as:
—
Decoding the entities, that results in these code points:
U+00E2 U+20AC U+201D
I.e. the characters —. The XML should have been —, the decimal representation of 0x2014, so this is probably a bug in the SF.net exporter.
Now I'm looking to reverse the process, but I can't find a way to get the above output from this Unicode character, no matter what erroneous encoding/decoding sequence I try. Any idea what happened here and how to reverse the process?
The the XML output is incorrectly been encoded using CP1252. To revert this, convert — to bytes using CP1252 encoding and then convert those bytes back to string/char using UTF-8 encoding.
Java based evidence:
String s = "—";
System.out.println(new String(s.getBytes("CP1252"), "UTF-8")); // —
Note that this assumes that the stdout console uses by itself UTF-8 to display the character.
In .Net, Encoding.UTF8.GetString(Encoding.GetEncoding(1252).GetBytes("—")) returns —.
SourceForge converted it to UTF8, interpreted the each of the bytes as characters in CP1252, then saved the characters as three separate entities using the actual Unicode codepoints for those characters.
This question already has answers here:
What is the difference between UTF-8 and Unicode?
(18 answers)
Closed 6 years ago.
Consider:
Is it true that unicode=utf16?
Many are saying Unicode is a standard, not an encoding, but most editors support save as Unicode encoding actually.
As Rasmus states in his article "The difference between UTF-8 and Unicode?":
If asked the question, "What is the difference between UTF-8 and
Unicode?", would you confidently reply with a short and precise
answer? In these days of internationalization all developers should be
able to do that. I suspect many of us do not understand these concepts
as well as we should. If you feel you belong to this group, you should
read this ultra short introduction to character sets and encodings.
Actually, comparing UTF-8 and Unicode is like comparing apples and
oranges:
UTF-8 is an encoding - Unicode is a character
set
A character set is a list of characters with unique numbers (these
numbers are sometimes referred to as "code points"). For example, in
the Unicode character set, the number for A is 41.
An encoding on the other hand, is an algorithm that translates a
list of numbers to binary so it can be stored on disk. For example
UTF-8 would translate the number sequence 1, 2, 3, 4 like this:
00000001 00000010 00000011 00000100
Our data is now translated into binary and can now be saved to
disk.
All together now
Say an application reads the following from the disk:
1101000 1100101 1101100 1101100 1101111
The app knows this data represent a Unicode string encoded with
UTF-8 and must show this as text to the user. First step, is to
convert the binary data to numbers. The app uses the UTF-8 algorithm
to decode the data. In this case, the decoder returns this:
104 101 108 108 111
Since the app knows this is a Unicode string, it can assume each
number represents a character. We use the Unicode character set to
translate each number to a corresponding character. The resulting
string is "hello".
Conclusion
So when somebody asks you "What is the difference between UTF-8 and
Unicode?", you can now confidently answer short and precise:
UTF-8 (Unicode Transformation Format) and Unicode cannot be compared. UTF-8 is an encoding
used to translate numbers into binary data. Unicode is a character set
used to translate characters into numbers.
most editors support save as ‘Unicode’ encoding actually.
This is an unfortunate misnaming perpetrated by Windows.
Because Windows uses UTF-16LE encoding internally as the memory storage format for Unicode strings, it considers this to be the natural encoding of Unicode text. In the Windows world, there are ANSI strings (the system codepage on the current machine, subject to total unportability) and there are Unicode strings (stored internally as UTF-16LE).
This was all devised in the early days of Unicode, before we realised that UCS-2 wasn't enough, and before UTF-8 was invented. This is why Windows's support for UTF-8 is all-round poor.
This misguided naming scheme became part of the user interface. A text editor that uses Windows's encoding support to provide a range of encodings will automatically and inappropriately describe UTF-16LE as “Unicode”, and UTF-16BE, if provided, as “Unicode big-endian”.
(Other editors that do encodings themselves, like Notepad++, don't have this problem.)
If it makes you feel any better about it, ‘ANSI’ strings aren't based on any ANSI standard, either.
It's not that simple.
UTF-16 is a 16-bit, variable-width encoding. Simply calling something "Unicode" is ambiguous, since "Unicode" refers to an entire set of standards for character encoding. Unicode is not an encoding!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode#Unicode_Transformation_Format_and_Universal_Character_Set
and of course, the obligatory Joel On Software - The Absolute Minimum Every Software Developer Absolutely, Positively Must Know About Unicode and Character Sets (No Excuses!) link.
There's a lot of misunderstanding being displayed here. Unicode isn't an encoding, but the Unicode standard is devoted primarily to encoding anyway.
ISO 10646 is the international character set you (probably) care about. It defines a mapping between a set of named characters (e.g., "Latin Capital Letter A" or "Greek small letter alpha") and a set of code points (a number assigned to each -- for example, 61 hexadecimal and 3B1 hexadecimal for those two respectively; for Unicode code points, the standard notation would be U+0061 and U+03B1).
At one time, Unicode defined its own character set, more or less as a competitor to ISO 10646. That was a 16-bit character set, but it was not UTF-16; it was known as UCS-2. It included a rather controversial technique to try to keep the number of necessary characters to a minimum (Han Unification -- basically treating Chinese, Japanese and Korean characters that were quite a bit alike as being the same character).
Since then, the Unicode consortium has tacitly admitted that that wasn't going to work, and now concentrate primarily on ways to encode the ISO 10646 character set. The primary methods are UTF-8, UTF-16 and UCS-4 (aka UTF-32). Those (except for UTF-8) also have LE (little endian) and BE (big-endian) variants.
By itself, "Unicode" could refer to almost any of the above (though we can probably eliminate the others that it shows explicitly, such as UTF-8). Unqualified use of "Unicode" probably happens the most often on Windows, where it will almost certainly refer to UTF-16. Early versions of Windows NT adopted Unicode when UCS-2 was current. After UCS-2 was declared obsolete (around Win2k, if memory serves), they switched to UTF-16, which is the most similar to UCS-2 (in fact, it's identical for characters in the "basic multilingual plane", which covers a lot, including all the characters for most Western European languages).
UTF-16 and UTF-8 are both encodings of Unicode. They are both Unicode; one is not more Unicode than the other.
Don't let an unfortunate historical artifact from Microsoft confuse you.
The development of Unicode was aimed
at creating a new standard for mapping
the characters in a great majority of
languages that are being used today,
along with other characters that are
not that essential but might be
necessary for creating the text. UTF-8
is only one of the many ways that you
can encode the files because there are
many ways you can encode the
characters inside a file into Unicode.
Source:
http://www.differencebetween.net/technology/difference-between-unicode-and-utf-8/
In addition to Trufa's comment, Unicode explicitly isn't UTF-16. When they were first looking into Unicode, it was speculated that a 16-bit integer might be enough to store any code, but in practice that turned out not to be the case. However, UTF-16 is another valid encoding of Unicode - alongside the 8-bit and 32-bit variants - and I believe is the encoding that Microsoft use in memory at runtime on the NT-derived operating systems.
Let's start from keeping in mind that data is stored as bytes; Unicode is a character set where characters are mapped to code points (unique integers), and we need something to translate these code points data into bytes. That's where UTF-8 comes in so called encoding – simple!
It's weird. Unicode is a standard, not an encoding. As it is possible to specify the endianness I guess it's effectively UTF-16 or maybe 32.
Where does this menu provide from?
I have a Perl script that is being called by third parties to send me names of people who have registered my software. One of these parties encodes the names in UTF-8, so I have adapted my script accordingly to decode UTF-8 to ASCII with Encode::decode_utf8(...).
This usually works fine, but every 6 months or so one of the names contains cyrillic, greek or romanian characters, so decoding the name results in garbage characters such as "ПодражанÑкаÑ". I have to follow-up with the customer and ask him for a "latin character version" of his name in order to issue a registration code.
So, is there any Perl module that can detect whether there are such characters and automatically translates them to their closest ASCII representation if necessary?
It seems that I can use Lingua::Cyrillic::Translit::ICAO plus Lingua::DetectCharset to handle Cyrillic, but I would prefer something that works with other character sets as well.
I believe you could use Text::Unidecode for this, it is precisely what it tries to do.
In the documentation for Text::Unicode, under "Caveats", it appears that this phrase is incorrect:
Make sure that the input data really is a utf8 string.
UTF-8 is a variable-length encoding, whereas Text::Unidecode only accepts a fixed-length (two-byte) encoding for each character. So that sentence should read:
Make sure that the input data really is a string of two-byte Unicode characters.
This is also referred to as UCS-2.
If you want to convert strings which really are utf8, you would do it like so:
my $decode_status = utf8::decode($input_to_be_converted);
my $converted_string = unidecode ($input_to_be_converted);
If you have to deal with UTF-8 data that are not in the ascii range, your best bet is to change your backend so it doesn't choke on utf-8. How would you go about transliterating kanji signs?
If you get cyrilic text there is no "closest ASCII representation" for many characters.