This site will have limited functionality while we undergo maintenance to improve your experience. If an article doesn't solve your issue and you want to ask a question, we have our support community waiting to help you at @FirefoxSupport on Twitter and/r/firefox on Reddit.

Avatar for Username

Etsi tuesta

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Lue lisää

Ketju on arkistoitu. Esitä kysymys, jos tarvitset apua.

Is there a best character encoding setting for en.Wikipedia?

  • 3 vastausta
  • 1 henkilöllä on sama ongelma
  • 9 näyttöä
  • Viimeisin kirjoittaja knorretje

Nopy
Nopy
more options

I have Firefox 8.0, with default UTF-8 character encoding (but have tried seemingly all others, none of which resolve certain characters on Wikipedia.) I know character encoding is complex relative to various changing standards, but doesn’t en.Wikipedia have a standard characters set that I can then select in Firefox?

(e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28letter%29 - U+1090C, U+13216, U+0F56 U+0F7C U+0F51 – etc.)

I have to copy and convert glyphs via a site like this - http://www.rishida.net/tools/conversion/ - and then lookup the Unicode character values via a site like this - http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1090c/index.htm

Is there a better way? (Thank you for your time!)

I have Firefox 8.0, with default UTF-8 character encoding (but have tried seemingly all others, none of which resolve certain characters on Wikipedia.) I know character encoding is complex relative to various changing standards, but doesn’t en.Wikipedia have a standard characters set that I can then select in Firefox? (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28letter%29 - U+1090C, U+13216, U+0F56 U+0F7C U+0F51 – etc.) I have to copy and convert glyphs via a site like this - http://www.rishida.net/tools/conversion/ - and then lookup the Unicode character values via a site like this - http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1090c/index.htm Is there a better way? (Thank you for your time!)

Valittu ratkaisu

If you do not see those characters then you need to install a font.

𐤌 𓈖 བ ོ ད

Lue tämä vastaus kontekstissaan 👍 0

Kaikki vastaukset (3)

cor-el
cor-el
  • Moderator
  • Top 10 Contributor
more options

Valittu ratkaisu

If you do not see those characters then you need to install a font.

𐤌 𓈖 བ ོ ད

Muokattu , muokkaaja cor-el

Nopy
Nopy Kysymyksen kysyjä
more options

I don’t understand that. (Me not so smart.) If there is a standardized Unicode value associated with glyph X, then how is it that none of the Unicode character sets in Firefox abide? Add a font? As I understand it, a font is just a re-representation of known characters. It seems like I’m hearing that not only does there have to be a character set decode of the data I’m viewing, but also a font that takes that Unicode value and translates it to something visual. That doesn’t wash. Between databases data is converted to and fro, irrespective of OS/App fonts installed. Sybase <-> Oracle doesn’t need a font installed. Viewing from SQL I don’t need a font installed.

But – thank you cor-el for effectively resolving my problem – even if I don’t understand the logic. Thank you for taking the time to reply!

knorretje
knorretje
more options

Most fonts only have a limited number of glyphs for a specific range of Unicode codepoints. So if some characters are missing it usually means that the current font simply does not have a glyph for it. So you need another font like cor-el suggested.
The encoding only decides how the raw stream of bytes is converted to codepoints. It is not related do displaying things. The best encoding depends on the data that is sent by the server.