Does the term multibyte refer to a charset whose characters can - but don't have to be - wider than 1 byte, (e.g. UTF-8) or does it refer to character sets which are in any case wider than 1 byte (e.g. UTF-16) ? In other words: What is meant if anybody talks about multibyte character sets?
-
Typically the former, i.e. UTF-8-like. For more info, see Variable-width encoding.
-
The former - although the term "variable-length encoding" would be more appropriate.
-
I generally use it to refer to any character that can have more than one byte per character.
-
Did you check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-byte_character_set Or this: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5z097dxa(VS.71).aspx
-
All character sets where you dont have a 1 byte = 1 character mapping. All Unicode variants, but also asian character sets are multibyte.
For more information, I suggest reading this Wikipedia article.
-
A multibyte character will mean a character whose encoding requires more than 1 byte. This does not imply however that all characters using that particular encoding will have the same width (in terms of bytes). E.g: UTF-8 and UTF-16 encoded character may use multiple bytes sometimes whereas all UTF-32 encoded characters always use 32-bits.
References:
-
The term is ambiguous, but in my internationalization work, we typically avoided the term "multibyte character sets" to refer to Unicode-based encodings. Generally, we used the term only for legacy encoding schemes that had one or more bytes to define each character (excluding encodings that require only one byte per character).
Shift-jis, jis, euc-jp, euc-kr, along with Chinese encodings are typically included.
Most of the legacy encodings, with some exceptions, require a sort of state machine model (or, more simply, a page swapping model) to process, and moving backwards in a text stream is complicated and error-prone. UTF-8 and UTF-16 do not suffer from this problem, as UTF-8 can be tested with a bitmask and UTF-16 can be tested against a range of surrogate pairs, so moving backward and forward in a non-pathological document can be done safely without major complexity.
A few legacy encodings, for languages like Thai and Vietnamese, have some of the complexity of multibyte character sets but are really just built on combining characters, and aren't generally lumped in with the broad term "multibyte."
-
Here is joel's article about unicode http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Unicode.html
-
What is meant if anybody talks about multibyte character sets?
That, as usual, depends on who is doing the talking!
Logically, it should include UTF-8, Shift-JIS, GB etc.: the variable-length encodings. UTF-16 would often not be considered in this group (even though it kind of is, what with the surrogates; and certainly it's multiple bytes when encoded into bytes via UTF-16LE/UTF-16BE).
But in Microsoftland the term would more typically be used to mean a variable-length default system codepage (for legacy non-Unicode applications, of which there are sadly still plenty). In this usage, UTF-8 and UTF-16LE/UTF-16BE cannot be included because the system codepage on Windows cannot be set to either of these encodings.
Indeed, in some cases “mbcs” is no more than a synonym for the system codepage, otherwise known (even more misleadingly) as “ANSI”. In this case a “multibyte” character set could actually be something as trivial as cp1252 Western European, which only uses one byte per character!
My advice: use “variable-length” when you mean that, and avoid the ambiguous term “multibyte”; when someone else uses it you'll need to ask for clarification, but typically someone with a Windows background will be talking about a legacy East Asian codepage like cp932 (Shift-JIS) and not a UTF.
