I have a bunch of XML files that are declared as encoding="IBM1047" but they don't seem to be:
when converted with iconv from IBM1047 to UTF-8 or ISO8859-1 (Latin 1) they result in indecipherable garbage
file -i <name_of_file> says "unknown 8-bit encoding"
when parsed by an XML parser the parser complains there is text before the prolog but there isn't; this error doesn't happen if I change the encoding in the XML declaration to something else
It would be nice to find out the real encoding of these files (I tried 'file -i' as mentioned above, and 'enca' but it's limited to Slavic languages (the files are in French)).
I have little control about how these files are produced; short of finding the actual encoding, if I can prove conclusively that the files are not in fact IBM1047 I may get the producer to do something about it.
How do I prove it?
Some special chars:
'é' is '©'
'à' is 'ë'
'è' is 'Û'
'ê' is 'ª'
The only way to prove that any class of data streams is encoded or not encoded in a particular way is to know, for at least one instance of the class, exactly what characters are supposed to be in the stream. If you have agreement on what characters are (supposed to be) in a particular test case, you can then calculate the bits that should be in the IBM 1047 (or any other) encoding of the test case, and compare those bits to the bits you actually see.
One simple way for EBCDIC data to be mangled, of course, is for it to have passed through some EBCDIC/ASCII gateway along the way that used a translate table designed for some other EBCDIC code page. But if you are working with EBCDIC data you presumably already know that.
Related
So I'm trying to open and parse some old Visual Studio compilation log files with Tcl; my only problem is the files are in a strange encoding. Upon examining them with Notepad++ it seems they are in the 'UCS-2 Little Endian' encoding. Two questions:
Is there any command in Tcl that allows me to look at the character encoding of a file? I know there is encoding system which tells me the system encoding.
Using encoding names Tcl tells me the available encoding names are the following list:
cp860 cp861 cp862 cp863 tis-620 cp864 cp865 cp866 gb12345 gb2312-raw cp949 cp950 cp869 dingbats ksc5601 macCentEuro cp874 macUkraine jis0201 gb2312 euc-cn euc-jp macThai iso8859-10 jis0208 iso2022-jp macIceland iso2022 iso8859-13 jis0212 iso8859-14 iso8859-15 cp737 iso8859-16 big5 euc-kr macRomania macTurkish gb1988 iso2022-kr macGreek ascii cp437 macRoman iso8859-1 iso8859-2 iso8859-3 macCroatian koi8-r iso8859-4 ebcdic iso8859-5 cp1250 macCyrillic iso8859-6 cp1251 macDingbats koi8-u iso8859-7 cp1252 iso8859-8 cp1253 iso8859-9 cp1254 cp1255 cp850 cp1256 cp932 identity cp1257 cp852 macJapan cp1258 shiftjis utf-8 cp855 cp936 symbol cp775 unicode cp857
Given this, what would be the appropriate name to use in the fconfigure -encoding command to read these UCS-2 Little Endianencoded files and convert them to UTF-8 for use? If I understand the fconfigure command correctly, I need to specify the encoding type of the source file rather than what I want it to be; I just don't know which of the options in the above list corresponds to UCS-2 Little Endian. After reading a little bit, I see that UCS-2 is a predecessor of the UTF-16 character encoding, but that option isn't here either.
Thanks!
I'm afraid, currently there's no way to do it just by using fconfigure -encoding ?something?: the unicode encoding has rather moot meaning, and there's a feature request to create explicit support for UTF-16 variants.
What you could do about it?
Since unicode in Tcl running on Windows should mean UTF-16 with native endianness1 (little-endian on Wintel), if your solution is supposed to be a quick and dirty one, just try using -encoding unicode and see if that helps.
If you're targeting at some more bullet-proof or future-proof of cross-platform solution, I'd switch the channel to binary more, read the contents in chunks of two bytes at a time, and then use
binary scan $twoBytes s n
to scan the sequence of two bytes in $twoBytes as an 16-bit integer into a variable named "n", followed by something like
set c [format %c $n]
to produce a unicode character out of the number in $n, and assign it to a variable.
This way supposedly requires a bit more trickery to get correctly:
You might check the very first character obtained from the stream to see if it's a byte-order-mark, and drop it if it is.
If you need to process the stream in a line-wise manner, you'd have to implement a little state machine that would handle the CR+LF sequences correctly.
When doing your read $channelId 2, to get the next character, you should check that it returned not just 0 or 2, but also 1 — in case the file happens to be corrupted, — and handle this.
The UCS-2 encoding differs from UTF-16 in that the latter might contain the so-called surrogate pairs, and hence it is not a fixed-length encoding. Hence handling an UTF-16 stream properly implies also detecting those surrogate pairs. On the other hand, I hardly beleive a compilation log produced by MSVS might contain them, so I'd just assume it's encoded in UCS-2LE.
1 The true story is that the only thing Tcl guarantees about textual strings it handles (that is, those obtained by maniputating text, not via binary format or encoding convertto or reading a stream in binary mode) is that they're Unicode (or, rather, the "BMP" part of it).
But technically, the interpreter might switch the internal representation of any string between the UTF-8 encoding it uses by default and some fixed-length encoding which is what is referred to by that name "unicode". The "problem" is that no part of Tcl documentation specifies that internal fixed-length encoding because you're required to explicitly convert any text you output or read to/from some specific encoding — either via configuring the stream or using encoding convertfrom and encoding convertto or using binary format and binary scan, and the interpreter will do the right thing no matter which precise encoding it's currently using for your source string value — it's all transparent. Moreover, the next release of the "standard" Tcl interpreter might decide to drop this internal feature completely, or, say, use 32-bit or 64-bit integers for that internal fixed-length encoding. Whatever "non-standard" interpreters do (like Jacl etc) are also up to them. In other words, this feature is internal and is not a part of the documented contract about the interpreter's behaviour. And by the way, the "standard" encoding for Tcl strings (UTF-8) is not specified as such either — it's just an implementation detail.
In Tcl v8.6.8 I could solve the same issue with fconfigure channelId -encoding unicode.
I'm working with a binary file that references another file using absolute paths.
The path contains both japanese and ascii characters.
The length of the string is given, so I can just read that many bytes and convert it into a string.
However the problem is trying to convert the string. If I specify the encoding as ascii, it'll fail on the japanese characters. If I specify it as japanese encoding (shift-jis or something), it won't read the english characters properly.
One byte is used for each ascii character, while two bytes are used for each japanese character.
What is the fastest and cleanest way to convert these bytes into a string? The encodings are known. Will the same technique work in older versions of python.
This sounds like you have fallen victim for a misunderstand the basics of Unicode and encodings. It may be that you have not, but misunderstandnings are common and understandable, while the situation you describe are not.
A string of bytes that contains mixed encodings are, per definition, invalid in any of these encodings. If this really was the case, you would have to split the bytes string into it's parts, and decode every part separately. In this case it would probably mean splitting on the path separators, so it would be reasonably easy, but in other cases it would not. However, I serously doubt that this is the case, as it would mean that your source is insane. That happens, but it is unlikely. :-)
If the source gives you one path as a bytes string, it is most likely that this string uses only one encoding. It may contain both Japanese and ASCII-characters and still be using one encoding. The most common encodings that can handle both Japanese and ASCII are UTF-8 and UTF-16. My guess is that your source uses one of those. In fact, since you write "One byte is used for each ascii character, while two bytes are used for each japanese character" it is probably UTF-8. It could also be Shift JIS, but it seems you already tried that.
If not, please explain what your source is, and give examples of the byte strings (in ASCII/HEX) that you are given.
When reading a text file that was created somewhere else outside my app, the encoding used is unknown. My app has being using NSUnicodeStringEncoding (which is the same as NSUTF16StringEncoding) so have problems reading other than UTF16 encoded files.
Is there a way I can guess the encoding of a file? My priority is to be able to read UTF8 files and then all other files.
Is iterating through available encodings and check if read string's length is more than zero is really a good approach?
Thanks in advance.
Ignacio
Apple's documentation has some guidance on how to proceed: String Programming Guide: Reading data with an unknown encoding:
If you are forced to guess the encoding (and note that in the absence of explicit information, it is a guess):
Try stringWithContentsOfFile:usedEncoding:error: or initWithContentsOfFile:usedEncoding:error: (or the URL-based equivalents).
These methods try to determine the encoding of the resource, and if successful return by reference the encoding used.
If (1) fails, try to read the resource by specifying UTF-8 as the encoding.
If (2) fails, try an appropriate legacy encoding.
"Appropriate" here depends a bit on circumstances; it might be the default C string encoding, it might be ISO or Windows Latin 1, or something else, depending on where your data is coming from.
If the file is properly constructed you can read the first four bytes and see if it is a BOM (Byte Order Mark):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byte-order_mark
I'm writing a python3 program, that gets the names of files to process from command-line arguments. I'm confused regarding what is the proper way to handle different encodings.
I think I'd rather consider filenames as bytes and not strings, since that avoids the danger of using an incorrect encoding. Indeed, some of my file names use an incorrect encoding (latin1 when my system locale uses utf-8), but that doesn't prevent tools like ls from working. I'd like my tool to be resilient to that as well.
I have two problems: the command-line arguments are given to me as strings (I use argparse), and I want to report errors to the user as strings.
I've successfuly adapted my code to use binaries, and my tool can handle files whose name are invalid in the current default encoding, as long as it is by recursing trough the filesystem, because I convert the arguments to binaries early, and use binaries when calling fs functions. When I receive a filename argument which is invalid, however, it is handed to me as a unicode string with strange characters like \udce8. I do not know what these are, and trying to encode it always fail, be it with utf8 or with the corresponding (wrong) encoding (latin1 here).
The other problem is for reporting errors. I expect users of my tool to parse my stdout (hence wanting to preserve filenames), but when reporting errors on stderr I'd rather encode it in utf-8, replacing invalid sequences with appropriate "invalid/question mark" characters.
So,
1) Is there a better, completely different way to do it ? (yes, fixing the filenames is planned, but i'd still like my tool to be robust)
2) How do I get the command line arguments in their original binary form (not pre-decoded for me), knowing that for invalid sequences re-encoding the decoded argument will fail, and
3) How do I tell the utf-8 codec to replace invalid, undecodable sequences with some invalid mark rather than dying on me ?
When I receive a filename argument
which is invalid, however, it is
handed to me as a unicode string with
strange characters like \udce8.
Those are surrogate characters. The low 8 bits is the original invalid byte.
See PEP 383: Non-decodable Bytes in System Character Interfaces.
Don't go against the grain: filenames are strings, not bytes.
You shouldn't use a bytes when you should use a string. A bytes is a tuple of integers. A string is a tuple of characters. They are different concepts. What you're doing is like using an integer when you should use a boolean.
(Aside: Python stores all strings in-memory under Unicode; all strings are stored the same way. Encoding specifies how Python converts the on-file bytes into this in-memory format.)
Your operating system stores filenames as strings under a specific encoding. I'm surprised you say that some filenames have different encodings; as far as I know, the filename encoding is system-wide. Functions like open default to the default system filename encoding, for example.
I'm trying to make some of my code a bit more friendly to non-pure-ascii systems and was wondering if there was a particular character encoding used for NEEDED entries in ELF binaries, or is it rather unstandard and based on the creating system's filesystem encoding (or even just directly the bytes that were passed to whatever created the binary) (if so is there any place in the binary that specifies the encoding? assuming the current systems encoding wouldn't work very well for my usage I think), are non-ascii names pretty much banned or something else?
ELF format specifies NEEDED fields as "null-terminated string" and does not say more about the encoding, which pretty much implies 8-bit ASCII string.
I personally don't see any point in complicating executable file format specification that does not provide any additional value for the final product or development process: the user won't see library names, so they wouldn't care about localization of thereof. You may try to use UTF-8, but actual file system encoding is not guaranteed to be UTF-8. To be sure you need to know how your target linker handles those strings.
As far as I know, the standard Unix way of dealing with non-ASCII characters is to encode them as UTF-8.