Modern Chinese Japanese and Korean typefaces typically use regional or historical variants of a given Han character. In the formulation of Unicode an attempt was made to unify these variants by considering them different glyphs representing the same "grapheme" or orthographic unit hence "Han unification" with the resulting character repertoire sometimes contracted to Unihan.

Unihan can also refer to the Unihan Database maintained by the Unicode Consortium which provides information about all of the unified Han characters encoded in the Unicode standard including mappings to various national and industry standards indices into standard dictionaries encoded variants pronunciations in various languages and an English definition. The database is available to the public as text files and via an interactive Web site. The latter also includes representative glyphs and definitions for compound words drawn from the free Japanese EDICT and Chinese CEDICT dictionary projects (which are provided for convenience and are not a formal part of the Unicode standard). Contents 1 Rationale and controversy 1.1 Graphemes versus glyphs 1.2 Unihan "abstract characters" 1.3 Alternatives 2 Examples of language dependent characters 3 Examples of some non-unified Han ideographs 4 Unicode ranges 5 Unihan database files 6 See also 7 Notes 8 References 9 External links Rationale and controversy This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2007)

Rules for Han unification are given in the East Asian Scripts chapter of the various versions of the Unicode Standard (Chapter 12 in Unicode 6.0).1 The Ideographic Rapporteur Group (IRG)2 made up of experts from the Chinese-speaking countries North and South Korea Japan Vietnam and other countries is responsible for the process.

One possible rationale is the desire to limit the size of the full Unicode character set where CJK characters as represented by discrete ideograms may approach or exceed 100000 (while those required for ordinary literacy in any language are probably under 3000). Version 1 of Unicode was designed to fit into 16 bits and only 20940 characters (32%) out of the possible 65536 were reserved for these CJK Unified Ideographs. Later Unicode has been extended to 21 bits allowing many more CJK characters (75960 are assigned with room for more).

The secret life of Unicode article located on IBM DeveloperWorks attempts to illustrate part of the motivation for Han unification: The problem stems from the fact that Unicode encodes characters rather than "glyphs" which are the visual representations of the characters. There are four basic traditions for East Asian character shapes: traditional Chinese simplified Chinese Japanese and Korean. While the Han root character may be the same for CJK languages the glyphs in common use for the same characters may not be and new characters were invented in each country.

For example the traditional Chinese glyph for "grass" uses four strokes for the "grass" radical whereas the simplified Chinese Japanese and Korean glyphs use three. But there is only one Unicode point for the grass character (U+8349) regardless of writing system. Another example is the ideograph for "one" ( or ) which is different in Chinese Japanese and Korean. Many people think that the three versions should be encoded differently.

In fact the three ideographs for "one" are encoded separately in Unicode as they are not considered national variants. The first and second are used on financial instruments to prevent tampering (they may be considered variants) while the third is the common form in all three countries.

However Han unification has also caused considerable controversy particularly among the Japanese public who with the nation's literati have a history of protesting the culling of historically and culturally significant variants. (See Kanji#Orthographic reform and lists of kanji. Today the list of characters officially recognized for use in proper names continues to expand at a modest pace.) Graphemes versus glyphs The Latin small "a" has widely differing glyphs that all represent concrete instances of the same abstract grapheme. While a native reader of any language using the Latin script recognizes these two glyphs as the same grapheme to others they might appear to be completely unrelated. A grapheme is the smallest abstract unit of meaning in a writing system. Any grapheme has many possible glyph expressions but all are recognized as the same grapheme by those with reading and writing knowledge of a particular writing system. While Unicode typically assigns characters to code points to express the graphemes within a system of writing the Unicode standard (section 3.4 D7) does caution: An abstract character does not necessarily correspond to what a user thinks of as a "character" and should not be confused with a grapheme. However this refers to the fact that some graphemes are composed of several characters. So for example the character "a" (U+0061) combined with a circle above (U+030A) (i.e. ) might be understood by a user as a single grapheme while being composed of multiple Unicode abstract characters. In addition Unicode also assigns some code points to a small number (other than for compatibility reasons) of formatting characters whitespace characters and other abstract characters that are not graphemes but instead used to control the breaks between lines words graphemes and grapheme clusters. With the unified Han ideographs the Unicode standard makes a departure from prior practices in assigning abstract characters not as graphemes but according to the underlying meaning of the grapheme: what linguists sometimes call sememes. This departure therefore is not simply explained by the oft quoted distinction between an abstract character and a glyph but is more rooted in the difference between an abstract character assigned as a grapheme and an abstract character assigned as a sememe. In contrast consider Unicode's unification of punctuation and diacritics where graphemes with widely different meanings (for example an apostrophe and a single quotation mark) are unified because the graphemes are the same. For Unihan the characters are not unified by their appearance but by their definition or meaning. For a grapheme to be represented by various glyphs means that the grapheme has glyph variations that are usually determined by selecting one font or another or using glyph substitution features where multiple glyphs are included in a single font. Such glyph variations are considered by Unicode a feature of rich text protocols and not properly handled by the plain text goals of Unicode. However when the change from one glyph to another constitutes a change from one grapheme to anotherwhere a glyph cannot possibly still for example mean the same grapheme understood as the small letter "a"Unicode separates those into separate code points. For Unihan the same thing is done whenever the abstract meaning changes however rather than speaking of the abstract meaning of a grapheme (the letter "a") the unification of Han ideographs assigns a new code point for each different meaningeven if that meaning is expressed by distinct graphemes in different languages. While a grapheme such as "" might mean something different in English (as used in the word "cordinated") than it does in German it is still the same grapheme and can be easily unified so that English and German can share a common abstract Latin writing system (along with Latin itself).3 To deal with the use of different graphemes for the same Unihan sememe Unicode has relied on several mechanisms to deal with the issue: especially as it relates to rendering text. One has been to treat it as simply a font issue so that different fonts might be used to render Chinese Japanese or Korean. Also font formats such as OpenType allow for the mapping of alternate glyphs according to language so that a text rendering system can look to the user's environmental settings to determine which glyph to use. The problem with these approaches is that they fail to meet the goals of Unicode to support multilingual text within the same document.4 So rather than treat the issue as a rich text problem of glyph alternates Unicode added the concept of variation selectors first introduced in version 3.2 and supplemented in version 4.0.5 While variation selectors are treated as combining characters they have no associated diacritic or mark. Instead by combining with a base character they signal the two character sequence selects a variation (typically in terms of grapheme but also in terms of underlying meaning as in the case of a location name or other proper noun) of the base character. This then is not a selection of an alternate glyph but the selection of a grapheme variation or a variation of the base abstract character. Such a two-character sequence however can be easily mapped to a separate single glyph in modern fonts. Since Unicode has assigned 256 separate variation selectors it is capable of assigning 256 variations for any Han ideograph. Such variations can be specific to one language or another and enable the encoding of plain text that includes such grapheme variations. Unihan "abstract characters" Since the Unihan standard encodes "abstract characters" not "glyphs" the graphical artifacts produced by Unicode have been considered temporary technical hurdles and at most cosmetic. However again particularly in Japan due in part to the way in which Chinese characters were incorporated into Japanese writing systems historically the inability to specify a particular variant is considered a significant obstacle to the use of Unicode in scholarly work. For example the unification of "grass" (explained above) means that a historical text cannot be encoded so as to preserve its peculiar orthography. Instead for example the scholar would be required to locate the desired glyph in a specific typeface in order to convey the text as written defeating the purpose of a unified character set. Unicode has responded to these needs by assigning variation selectors so that authors can select grapheme variations of particular ideographs (or even other characters).5 Small differences in graphical representation are also problematic when they affect legibility or the wrong cultural tradition. Besides making some Unicode fonts unusable for texts involving multiple "Unihan languages" names or other orthographically sensitive terminology might be displayed incorrectly. (Proper names tend to be especially orthographically conservativecompare this to changing the spelling of one's name to suit a language reform in the U.S. or U.K.) While this may be considered primarily a graphical representation or rendering problem to be overcome by more artful fonts the widespread use of Unicode would make it difficult to preserve such distinctions. The problem of one character representing semantically different concepts is also present in the Latin part of Unicode. The Unicode character for an apostrophe is the same as the character for a right single quote (). On the other hand it is sometimes pointed out that the capital Latin letter "A" is not unified with the Greek letter "" (Alpha). This is of course desirable for reasons of compatibility and deals with a much smaller alphabetic character set. While the unification aspect of Unicode is controversial in some quarters for the reasons given above Unicode itself does now encode a vast number of seldom-used characters of a more-or-less antiquarian nature. Some of the controversy stems from the fact that the very decision of performing Han unification was made by the initial Unicode Consortium which at the time was a consortium of North American companies and organizations (most of them in California)6 but included no East Asia government representatives. The initial design goal was to create a 16-bit standard and Han unification was therefore a critical step for avoiding tens of thousands of character duplications.7 This 16-bit requirement was later abandoned making the size of the character set less an issue today. The controversy later extended to the internationally representative ISO: the initial CJK-JRG group favored a proposal (DIS 10646) for a non-unified character set "which was thrown out in favor of unification with the Unicode Consortium's unified character set by the votes of American and European ISO members" (even though the Japanese position was unclear).8 Endorsing the Unicode Han unification was a necessary step for the heated ISO 10646/Unicode merger. Much of the controversy surrounding Han unification is based on the distinction between glyphs as defined in Unicode and the related but distinct idea of graphemes. Unicode assigns abstract characters (graphemes) as opposed to glyphs which are a particular visual representations of a character in a specific typeface. One character may be represented by many distinct glyphs for example a "g" or an "a" both of which may have one loop (a g) or two (a g). Yet for a reader of Latin script based languages the two variations of the "a" character are both recognized as the same grapheme. Graphemes present in national character code standards have been added to Unicode as required by Unicode's Source Separation rule even where they can be composed of characters already available. The national character code standards existing in CJK languages are considerably more involved given the technological limitations under which they evolved and so the official CJK participants in Han unification may well have been amenable to reform. Unlike European versions CJK Unicode fonts due to Han unification have large but irregular patterns of overlap requiring language-specific fonts. Unfortunately language-specific fonts also make it difficult to access to a variant which as with the "grass" example happens to appear more typically in another language style. (That is to say it would be difficult to access "grass" with the four-stroke radical more typical of Traditional Chinese in a Japanese environment which fonts would typically depict the three-stroke radical.) Unihan proponents tend to favor markup languages for defining language strings but this would not ensure the use of a specific variant in the case given only the language-specific font more likely to depict a character as that variant. (At this point merely stylistic differences do enter in as a selection of Japanese and Chinese fonts are not likely to be visually compatible.) Chinese users seem to have fewer objections to Han unification largely because Unicode did not attempt to unify Simplified Chinese characters (an invention of the People's Republic of China and in use among Chinese speakers in the PRC Singapore and Malaysia) with Traditional Chinese characters as used in Hong Kong Taiwan (Big5) and with some differences more familiar to Korean and Japanese users. Unicode is seen as neutral with regards to this politically charged issue and has encoded Simplified and Traditional Chinese glyphs separately (e.g. the ideograph for "discard" is U+4E1F for Traditional Chinese Big5 #A5E1 and U+4E22 for Simplified Chinese GB #2210). It is also noted that Traditional and Simplified characters should be encoded separately according to Unicode Han Unification rules because they are distinguished in pre-existing PRC character sets. Furthermore as with other variants Traditional to Simplified characters is not a one-to-one relationship. Alternatives Specialist character sets developed to addresscitation needed or regarded by somewho as not suffering from these perceived deficiencies include: ISO/IEC 2022 (based on sequence codes to switch between Chinese Japanese Korean character sets - hence without unification) CNS character set CCCII character set TRON UTF-2000note 1 Mojikyo Big5 extensions GCCS and its successor HKSCS However none of these alternative standards has been as widely adopted as Unicode which is now the base character set for many new standards and protocols and is built into the architecture of operating systems (Microsoft Windows Apple Mac OS X and many Unix-like systems) programming languages (Perl Python C# Java Common LISP APL) and libraries (IBM International Components for Unicode (ICU) along with the Pango Graphite Scribe Uniscribe and ATSUI rendering engines) font formats (TrueType and OpenType) and so on. Examples of language dependent characters In each row of the following table the same character is repeated in all five columns. However each column is marked (via the HTML lang attribute) as being in a different language: Chinese (3 varieties: unmarked "Chinese" simplified characters and traditional characters) Japanese or Korean. The browser should select for each character a glyph (from a font) suitable to the specified language. (Besides actual character variationlook for differences in stroke order number or directionthe typefaces may also reflect different typographical styles as with serif and non-serif alphabets.) This only works for fallback glyph selection if you have CJK fonts installed on your system and the font selected to display this article does not include glyphs for these characters. Note also that Unicode includes non-graphical language tag characters in the range U+E0000 U+E007F for plain text language tagging.9 Code Chinese (Generic) Chinese Simplified Chinese Traditional Japanese Korean U+4E0E U+4ECA U+4EE4 U+514D U+5165 U+5168 U+5177 U+5203 U+5316 U+5340 U+5916 U+60C5 U+624D U+6B21 U+6D77 U+6F22 U+753B U+76F4 U+771F U+7A7A U+7D00 U+8349 U+89D2 U+8ACB U+9053 U+9913 U+9AA8 Examples of some non-unified Han ideographs For some glyphs Unicode has encoded variant characters making it unnecessary to switch between fonts or language tags. In the following table the separate rows in each group contains the Unicode equivalent character using different code points. Note that for characters such as (U+5165) the only way to display the two variants is to change font (or language tag) as described in the previous table. However for (U+5167) there is an alternate character (U+5185) as illustrated below. For some characters like / (U+514C/U+5151) either method can be used to display the different glyphs. Code Chinese (Generic) Chinese Simplified Chinese Traditional Japanese Korean U+9AD8 U+9AD9 U+7D05 U+7EA2 U+4E1F U+4E22 U+4E57 U+4E58 U+4FA3 U+4FB6 U+514C U+5151 U+5167 U+5185 U+7522 U+7523 U+7A05 U+7A0E U+4E80 U+9F9C U+9F9F U+5225 U+522B U+4E21 U+4E24 U+5169 Unicode ranges v d e Character Types Scripts Unihan ideographs etc. Phonetic characters Punctuation and separators Diacritics and other marks Symbols Numerals Compatibility characters Control characters Other Topics Combining character Precomposed character Main article: CJK Unified Ideographs Ideographic characters assigned by Unicode appear in the following blocks: CJK Unified Ideographs (4E009FFF) CJK Unified Ideographs Extension A (34004DBF) CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B (200002A6DF) CJK Unified Ideographs Extension C (2A7002B73F) CJK Unified Ideographs Extension D (2B8402B81F) CJK Compatibility Ideographs (F900FAFF) (the twelve characters at FA0E FA0F FA11 FA13 FA14 FA1F FA21 FA23 FA24 FA27 FA28 and FA29 are actually "unified ideographs" not "compatibility ideographs") Unicode includes support of CJKV radicals strokes punctuation marks and symbols in the following blocks: CJK Radicals Supplement (2E802EFF) CJK Symbols and Punctuation (3000303F) (chart) CJK Strokes (31C031EF) Ideographic Description Characters (2FF02FFF) Additional compatibility (discouraged use) characters appear in these blocks: Kangxi Radicals (2F002FDF) Enclosed CJK Letters and Months (320032FF) (chart) CJK Compatibility (330033FF) (chart) CJK Compatibility Ideographs (F900FAFF) (chart) CJK Compatibility Ideographs (2F8002FA1F) CJK Compatibility Forms (FE30FE4F) (chart) These compatibility characters (excluding the twelve unified ideographs in the CJK Compatibility Ideographs block) are included for compatibility with legacy text handling systems and other legacy character sets. They include forms of characters for vertical text layout and rich text characters that Unicode recommends handling through other means. Unihan database files The Unihan project has always made an effort to make available their build database. An Unihan.zip file10 is provided on unicode.org. It contains all the data the Unihan team have collected. A project libUnihan (0.5.3)11 provides a normalized SQLite Unihan database and corresponding C library. All tables in this database are in fifth normal form. libUnihan is released as LGPL while its database UnihanDb is released as MIT License. See also Chinese character encoding GB 18030 Sinicization Z-variant List of CJK fonts Notes First proposed in 1998. However as of 2005update adoption of this proposed counter-standard is nearly non-existent. There has been little definitive standardization process or documents on UTF-2000 except for some conference presentations in 2000 and 2001. References The Unicode Standard Version 6.0 Chapter 12 East Asian Scripts 12.1 Han http://www.ogcio.gov.hk/ccli/eng/structure/irg.html This example also points to another reason that "abstract character" and grapheme as an abstract unit in a written language do not necessarily map one-ton-one. In English the combining diaeresis "" and the "o" it modifies may be seen as two separate graphemes while in languages such as Swedish the letter "" may be seen as a single grapheme. Similarly in English the dot on an "i" is understood as a part of the "i" grapheme while in other languages the dot may be seen as a separate grapheme added to the "i". "Unicode defines a consistent way of encoding multilingual text that enables the exchange of text data internationally and creates the foundation for global software." (Introduction first paragraph). a b See the Unicode Consortium's Ideographic Variation Database and the PDF code charts for variation selectors: Variation Selectors and Variation Selectors Supplement History of Unicode Early Years of Unicode http://www.unicode.org/history/unicode88.pdf "Unicode in Japan guide to a technical and psychological struggle" Unicode FAQ - Language Tagging See unicode.org/charts/unihan.html See libunihan.sourceforge.net External links Unihan Database Example of data for the han character "" Unicode standard IRG Page IRG working documents many big size pdfs some of them with details of CJK extensions Han Unification in Unicode by Otfried Cheong Why Unicode Won't Work on the Internet: Linguistic Political and Technical Limitations Why Unicode Will Work On The Internet Per-character summary of differences in characters The secret life of Unicode GB18030 Support Package for Windows 2000/XP including Chinese Tibetan Yi Mongolian and Thai font by Microsoft Proposal to encode additional grass radicals in the UCS A humorous proposal to encode all possible variants of the grass radical made as an April Fool's Day joke Unicode Technical Note 26: On the Encoding of Latin Greek Cyrillic and Han "Unicode Revisited" the strong point of view of some people working on the competing TRON proposal "Unicode in Japan guide to a technical and psychological struggle" A more balanced take on the arguments for and against Unicode for Japanese. v d eCJK ideographs in Unicode * Block name Chart range Plane Han unification Scripts contained CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs Extension A CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B CJK Unified Ideographs Extension B CJK Unified Ideographs Extension C CJK Unified Ideographs Extension D CJK Radicals Supplement Kangxi Radicals Ideographic Description Characters CJK Symbols and Punctuation CJK Strokes Enclosed CJK Letters and Months CJK Compatibility CJK Compatibility Ideographs CJK Compatibility Forms CJK Compatibility Ideographs Supplement  4E0062FF  630077FF  78008CFF  8D009FFF  34004DBF 20000215FF 21600230FF 23100245FF 24600260FF 26100275FF 27600290FF 291002A6DF 2A7002B73F 2B7402B81F  2E802EFF  2F002FDF  2FF02FFF  3000303F  31C031EF  320032FF  330033FF  F900FAFF  FE30FE4F 2F8002FA1F 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 2 SIP 2 SIP 2 SIP 2 SIP 2 SIP 2 SIP 2 SIP 2 SIP 2 SIP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 0 BMP 2 SIP CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs CJK Unified Ideographs Not unified Not unified Not unified Not unified Not unified Not unified Not unified Not unified but 12 of them Not unified Not unified Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Han Common Han Common Han Common Inherited Common Katakana Hangul Common Katakana Common Han Common Han * As of version 6.0 v d eUnicode Unicode Unicode Consortium  ISO/IEC 10646 (Universal Character Set) Code points Code point  Plane  Block  Mapping characters  Character property  Character charts Characters Special purpose BOM  Combining grapheme joiner  Left-to-right mark and Right-to-left mark  Zero-width non-breaking space  Zero-width joiner  Zero-width non-joiner  Zero-width space Miscellaneous lists Combining character  Duplicate characters  Graphic characters Processing Algorithms Bi-directional text  Collation (ISO 14651)  Equivalence Transformation BOCU-1  CESU-8  UTF-1  UTF-7  UTF-8  UTF-9/UTF-18  UTF-16/UCS-2  UTF-32/UCS-4  UTF-EBCDIC  Punycode  SCSU  Comparison On pairs of code points Equivalence  Combining character  Duplicates  Homoglyph  Precomposed character (List)  Compatibility characters  Z-variant Usage Unicode and e-mail  Unicode and HTML  Character entity references  Unicode input  Internationalized domain name  Numeric character reference  Private Use U+F8FF  Typefaces (fonts)  Script (Unicode) Related standards Common Locale Data Repository (CLDR)  GB 18030  Han unification  ISO/IEC 8859 (8-bit encodings)  ISO 14651 (Collation)  ISO 15924 (Script codes) Related topics Anomalies  ConScript Unicode Registry  Ideographic Rapporteur Group  International Components for Unicode  MUFI  People related to Unicode  Scripts and symbols in Unicode Common and inherited scripts Combining marks  Diacritics  Punctuation  Space Modern scripts Arabic (diacritics  Unicode blocks)  Armenian  Balinese  Batak  Bamum  Bengali  Bopomofo  Braille  Buginese  Buhid  Canadian Aboriginal  Cham  Cherokee  CJK Unified Ideographs (Han)  Cyrillic  Deseret  Devanagari  Ethiopic  Georgian  Greek  Gujarati  Gurmukhi  Kanji  Hanja  Hn t  Hangul  Hanunoo  Hebrew (diacritics)  Hiragana  Javanese  Kannada  Katakana  Kayah Li  Khmer  Lao  Latin  Lepcha  Limbu  Lisu  Malayalam  Mandaic  Meetei Mayek  Mongolian  Manchu  Myanmar  N'Ko  New Tai Lue  Ol Chiki  Oriya  Osmanya  Rejang  Samaritan  Saurashtra  Shavian  Sinhala  Sundanese  Syloti Nagri  Syriac  Tagalog  Tagbanwa  Tai Le  Tai Tham  Tai Viet  Tamil  Telugu  Thaana  Thai  Tibetan  Tifinagh  Vai  Yi Ancient and historic scripts Avestan  Brhm  Carian  Coptic  Sumero-Akkadian  Cypriot  Egyptian Hieroglyphs  Glagolitic  Gothic  Imperial Aramaic  Inscriptional Pahlavi  Inscriptional Parthian  Kaithi  Kharoshthi  Linear B  Lycian  Lydian  Ogham  Old Italic  Old Persian  Phags-pa  Phoenician  Old South Arabian  Old Turkic  Runic  Ugaritic Symbols Cultural political and religious symbols  Currency  Mathematical operators and symbols  Phonetic symbols (including IPA) v d eCharacter encodings Character sets Early telecommunications ASCII  ISO/IEC 646  ISO/IEC 6937  T.61  sixbit code pages  Baudot code  Morse code ISO/IEC 8859 -1  -2  -3  -4  -5  -6  -7  -8  -9  -10  -11  -12  -13  -14  -15  -16 Bibliographic use ANSEL  ISO 5426 / 5426-2 / 5427 / 5428 / 6438 / 6861 / 6862 / 10585 / 10586 / 10754 / 11822  MARC-8 National standards ArmSCII  CNS 11643  GOST 10859  GB 2312  HKSCS  ISCII  JIS X 0201  JIS X 0208  JIS X 0212  JIS X 0213  KPS 9566  KS X 1001  PASCII  TIS-620  TSCII  VISCII  YUSCII EUC CN  JP  KR  TW ISO/IEC 2022 CN  JP  KR  CCCII MacOS codepages ("scripts") Arabic  CentralEurRoman  ChineseSimp / EUC-CN  ChineseTrad / Big5  Croatian  Cyrillic  Devanagari  Dingbats  Farsi  Greek  Gujarati  Gurmukhi  Hebrew  Icelandic  Japanese / ShiftJIS  Korean / EUC-KR  Roman  Romanian  Symbol  Thai / TIS-620  Turkish  Ukrainian DOS codepages 437  720  737  775  850  852  855  857  858  860  861  862  863  864  865  866  869  Kamenick  Mazovia  MIK  Iran System Windows codepages 874 / TIS-620  932 / ShiftJIS  936 / GBK  949 / EUC-KR  950 / Big5  1250  1251  1252  1253  1254  1255  1256  1257  1258  1361  54936 / GB18030 EBCDIC codepages 37/1140  273/1141  277/1142  278/1143  280/1144  284/1145  285/1146  297/1147  420/16804  424/12712  500/1148  838/1160  871/1149  875/9067  930/1390  933/1364  937/1371  935/1388  939/1399  1025/1154  1026/1155  1047/924  1112/1156  1122/1157  1123/1158  1130/1164  JEF  KEIS Platform specific ATASCII  CDC display code  DEC-MCS  DEC Radix-50  Fieldata  GSM 03.38  HP roman8  PETSCII  TI calculator character sets  ZX Spectrum character set Unicode / ISO/IEC 10646 UTF-8  UTF-16/UCS-2  UTF-32/UCS-4  UTF-7  UTF-1  UTF-EBCDIC  GB 18030  SCSU  BOCU-1 Miscellaneous codepages APL  Cork  HZ  IBM code page 1133  KOI8  TRON Related topics control character (C0 C1)  CCSID  Character encodings in HTML  charset detection  Han unification  ISO 6429/IEC 6429/ANSI X3.64  mojibake