Just realizing that these 2 language can also be encoded with these
charsets (even though ISO-8859-13 would appear to be more common…
maybe?). Anyway now the models are updated and can recognize texts
using these encoding for these languages.
Added some test files as well, which work great.
I actually added also couples with ISO-8859-9, ISO-8859-15 and
Windows-1252. Nevertheless there are no differences on the main
characters related to Portuguese so differences will hardly be made
and detection will usually return ISO-8859-1 only.
"UHC" is the "Unified Hangul Code" (aka Windows-949 or CP949). It is
apparently "mostly" upward compatible with EUC-KR so returning UHC for
a strict EUC-KR document is usually not to be considered wrong.
Yet I can read that EUC-KR has its own way of representing hangul
syllables not available in precomposed form, and this is not supported
in UHC (since this latter has all possible precomposed syllables), hence
the "mostly" upward-compatibility.
My personal daily experience with Korean documents though is that I
encounter a lot of UHC-encoded files, probably because of predominance
of Microsoft operating systems, which spread this encoding.
So until we get 2 separate detection machines, let's just return EUC-KR
files as being "UHC".
I did this to improve the model after a user reported a Greek sutitle
badly detected (see commit e0eec3b).
It didn't help, but well... since I updated it with much more data from
Wikipedia. Let's just commit it!
Up to now, we were only considering positive sequences, which are
sequences of 2 characters which happen the most. Yet our data gather
4 categories of sequences (the last one being called "negative", since
they never happened in our data).
I will call the category below positive: probable sequences. They may
happen, yet not often. The last category could be called "neutral".
This seems to fix the detection of a user's subtitle example without
breaking any of our current unit tests.
Probably I should still review this whole logics more in details later.
This way it always shows up in ccmake, even if not defined.
A string is used instead of path because I personally think it makes more
sense in the following use-cases:
STRING:
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/home/user -DCMAKE_INSTALL_BINDIR=bins
installs everything to /home/user/{lib,etc,share,(...)} and executables to
${CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX}/bins
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/home/user -DCMAKE_INSTALL_BINDIR=/opt/bin
everything to /home/user/{lib,etc,share,(...)} and executables to
/opt/bin
PATH:
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/home/user -DCMAKE_INSTALL_BINDIR=bins
everything to /home/user/{lib,etc,share,(...)} and executables to
$(pwd)/bins (!)
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/home/user -DCMAKE_INSTALL_BINDIR=/opt/bin
same as STRING
I was planning on adding VISCII support as well, but Python encode()
method does not have any support for it apparently, so I cannot generate
the proper statistics data with the current version of the string.
There is no "exception" in encoding. The non-breaking space 0xA0 is not
ASCII, and therefore returning "ASCII" will later create issues (for
instance trying to re-encode with iconv produces an error).
This was obviously an explicit decision in original code (according to
code comments), probably tied to specifity of the original program from
Mozilla. Now we want strict detection.
I will return "ISO-8859-1" for "nearly-ASCII texts with NBSP as only
exception" (note that I could have returned any ISO-8859 charsets since
they all have this character in common).
According to RFC 2781, section 3.3: "Systems labelling UTF-16BE/LE text
MUST NOT prepend a BOM to the text."
Since uchardet cannot (and should not, obviously, it's not its role)
modify input text, when a BOM is present, we should always label the
encoding as "UTF-16" only.
Also it broke unit tests in using programs since a conversion from UTF-8
to UTF-16LE/BE would create a text without BOM, and a conversion from
UTF-16LE/BE to UTF-8 creates a UTF-8 text with a BOM, which changed
existing behaviours.
Same goes for UTF-32.
See also Unicode 5.0.0 standard, section 3.10 (tables 3.8 and 3.9 in
particular).
ISO-8859-11 is basically exactly identical to TIS-620, with the added
non-breaking space character.
Basically our detection will always return TIS-620 except for
exceptional cases when a text has a non-breaking space.
Control characters are not an error per-se. Nevertheless they are clearly not
frequent in single-byte charset texts. It is only normal for them to lower
confidence in a charset. In particular a higher ctrl-per-letter ratio means
a lower confidence.
This fixes for instance our Windows-1252 German test (otherwise detected as
ISO-8859-1).
Let's shortcut Single Byte charset detection on invalid codepoints.
Merging and fixing the contributor's commit conflicts after code
redesign: in particular we added an illegal character concept (they were
mixed with control characters in current charmaps. Yet ctrl characters
are NOT to be considered invalid) and constants instead of hardcoded
numbers ('ILL' rather than 255).
