Skip to content

Add alias for iso-8859-8-i which is the same as iso-8859-8 #62824

Closed

Description

@bitdancer
BPO 18624
Nosy @malemburg, @warsaw, @ezio-melotti, @bitdancer, @ringof
PRs
  • bpo-25416: add aliases for cp874 and mac_cyrillic encodings #10237
  • gh-62824: add alias for iso-8859-8-i and -e to iso_8859_8 #32279
  • Files
  • adding_aliases.patch: adding aliases to the iso-8859-8.
  • 8859-8_aliases_and_test.patch: added two aliases to 8859-8, commented out a missing tactis codec, added a test
  • Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = None
    closed_at = None
    created_at = <Date 2013-08-01.23:04:29.016>
    labels = ['easy', 'type-feature', 'expert-email', 'expert-unicode']
    title = 'Add alias for iso-8859-8-i which is the same as iso-8859-8'
    updated_at = <Date 2022-04-03.02:54:46.394>
    user = 'https://github.com/bitdancer'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2022-04-03.02:54:46.394>
    actor = 'dpg'
    assignee = 'none'
    closed = False
    closed_date = None
    closer = None
    components = ['Unicode', 'email']
    creation = <Date 2013-08-01.23:04:29.016>
    creator = 'r.david.murray'
    dependencies = []
    files = ['34449', '35736']
    hgrepos = []
    issue_num = 18624
    keywords = ['patch', 'easy', 'needs review']
    message_count = 11.0
    messages = ['194134', '194165', '194177', '194267', '194362', '194386', '213509', '213765', '213772', '213773', '221330']
    nosy_count = 9.0
    nosy_names = ['lemburg', 'barry', 'ezio.melotti', 'r.david.murray', 'das', 'kamie', 'mvolz', 'bensws', 'dpg']
    pr_nums = ['10237', '32279']
    priority = 'normal'
    resolution = None
    stage = 'patch review'
    status = 'open'
    superseder = None
    type = 'enhancement'
    url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue18624'
    versions = ['Python 3.4']

    Linked PRs

    Activity

    1. bitdancer commented on Aug 1, 2013

      @bitdancer
      MemberAuthor

      Emails and web pages may specify a character set of iso-8859-8-i, which has exactly the same code points as iso-8859-8. The -i has to do with how bi-directional text is handled, but doesn't affect the encoding: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2001Apr/0008.html

    2. malemburg commented on Aug 2, 2013

      @malemburg
      Member

      Here's a usable reference:

      http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/dirlang.html#bidi88598

      +1 on adding the alias.

      Also see

      http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lynx-dev/2012-02/msg00041.html

      for how Lynx does this.

      The URL also mentions "iso-8859-8-e", which should probably also be aliased to "iso-8859-8". Both names only apply to visual display characteristics of the text; the encoding is the same.

    3. bitdancer commented on Aug 2, 2013

      @bitdancer
      MemberAuthor

      I got the impression from what I read that -e included additional control sequences, but perhaps I misunderstood and that only meant that the data stream was expected to *use* additional control sequences but the control codes themselves are part of the base codec?

      I'm specifically thinking of this statement from the linked reference:

      "Because HTML uses the Unicode bidirectionality algorithm, conforming documents encoded using ISO 8859-8 must be labeled as "ISO-8859-8-i". Explicit directional control is also possible with HTML, but cannot be expressed with ISO 8859-8, so "ISO-8859-8-e" should not be used."

      The "cannot be expressed" seems to imply there are differences in the codec.

    4. malemburg commented on Aug 3, 2013

      @malemburg
      Member

      On 02.08.2013 16:37, R. David Murray wrote:

      I got the impression from what I read that -e included additional control sequences, but perhaps I misunderstood and that only meant that the data stream was expected to *use* additional control sequences but the control codes themselves are part of the base codec?

      I'm specifically thinking of this statement from the linked reference:

      "Because HTML uses the Unicode bidirectionality algorithm, conforming documents encoded using ISO 8859-8 must be labeled as "ISO-8859-8-i". Explicit directional control is also possible with HTML, but cannot be expressed with ISO 8859-8, so "ISO-8859-8-e" should not be used."

      The "cannot be expressed" seems to imply there are differences in the codec.

      No, not really. After some more research, I found that the -i and
      -e suffixes are defined in RFC 1556:

      http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1556

      At the codec level, these encodings are all the same. The suffixes
      define whether or not to interpret some of their control characters
      with respect to bidi text when visualizing the text.

    5. das commented on Aug 4, 2013

      dasmannequin
      Mannequin

      Is it satisfactory to just add the -i and -e variants to ALIASES in charset.py? Or don't they qualify as "Aliases for other commonly-used names for character sets"?

    6. bitdancer commented on Aug 4, 2013

      @bitdancer
      MemberAuthor

      This issue is actually about adding the aliases to the codecs module. I'm not entirely sure at this point what the canonical character set name should be for email output (which is what the ALIASES table controls).

    7. kamie commented on Mar 14, 2014

      kamiemannequin
      Mannequin

      I'm not sure about how the aliases are represented. I found some examples:

      http://web.mit.edu/Mozilla/src/mozilla/intl/uconv/src/charsetalias.properties

      So I wrote the aliases like this:

      'iso-8859-8-i' : 'iso8859_8_I',
      'iso-8859-8-e' : 'iso8859_8_E',

      But I'm not sure if I should write as shown in the example above or if it should looks like:

      'iso-8859-8-i' : 'iso8859_8',
      'iso-8859-8-e' : 'iso8859_8',

      And how about the tests? I couldn't locate the tests for this module. It it the tests inside the enconded_modules folder?

    8. kamie commented on Mar 16, 2014

      kamiemannequin
      Mannequin

      Adding aliases to the set of iso-8859-8.

    9. bitdancer commented on Mar 16, 2014

      @bitdancer
      MemberAuthor

      From python's point of view they are both aliases of iso-8859_8, as discussed in this issue. Python does not have iso-8859_8-e and i codecs, which you changes to the alias table implies that it does (the target of the entry in the aliases table is the python codec name...and there is only iso8859_8.py, not iso8859_8_E.py or _I.py).

    10. bitdancer commented on Mar 16, 2014

      @bitdancer
      MemberAuthor

      The tests are in test_encodings.py. It is interesting that the tests pass with your patch applied; that indicates that there is a missing test, since we should be testing that all of the values in the aliases table are the names of existing codecs, and apparently we aren't.

    11. bensws commented on Jun 23, 2014

      benswsmannequin
      Mannequin

      Added a patch with these two 8859-8 aliases and a corresponding test in test_codecs.py (couldn't find test_encodings.py mentioned in an earlier message). The test also found a missing 'tactis' codec (bpo-1251921), so I've commented it out in the aliases.py file. Please take a look.

    12. 2 remaining items

    13. added
      stdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directory
      on Nov 23, 2023
    14. added a commit that references this issue on May 20, 2025
    15. added a commit that references this issue on May 20, 2025
    16. added a commit that references this issue on May 20, 2025
    17. added a commit that references this issue on May 27, 2025
    18. added a commit that references this issue on May 27, 2025
    19. added a commit that references this issue on May 27, 2025
    20. added a commit that references this issue on May 27, 2025
    21. added 2 commits that reference this issue on Jul 12, 2025
    22. added 2 commits that reference this issue on Aug 4, 2025
    23. added a commit that references this issue on Jun 2, 2026
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

    Metadata

    Metadata

    Assignees

    No one assigned

      Labels

      Projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions