Talk:KOI character encodings

Does KOI8-CS for Czech and Slovakian really exist? Both languages are written with the latin alphabet. I found no nothing about KOI8-CS on the Web. I'll remove it in a few days unless somebody provides proof of their existance.

91.41.107.190 (talk) 14:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(I know this is old, but still) I, too, was surprised, however it seems that they really do exist. I've added the respective references to the article. 78.50.190.53 (talk) 01:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

KOI8-E

The following text was in the article:

*[[KOI8-E]] / [[KOI8-CYRILLIC]] (ISO-IR-153,<ref>[https://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/iso-ir/153.pdf ISO-IR-153 (1 December 1989)]</ref> ST SEV 358-88, traditional Cyrillic order, only for Russian<!-- Please, do not cite GOST 19768-74 which only defined the original KOI-8 with АБЦД..., this is a persistent error repeated here and there.-->).<ref name="Cruz_2010_Kermit"/>

Now, the Kermit reference only mentions GOST 19768-74 (noted in the existing comment as defining the original KOI-8), not ST SEV 358-88 or ISO-IR-153. Moreover, the IANA list KOI8-E as meaning ISO-IR-111. (As a sidenote, KOI8-E and KOI8-CYRILLIC redirect to ISO-IR-111.)

The applicability of "KOI8-E" to ISO-IR-153 specifically is therefore unsourced, and the applicability of "KOI8-E" to ISO-IR-111 in at least some contexts is therefore sourced (IANA).

Add to this that ISO-IR-153 does not follow the KOI layout (it's a subset of ISO-8859-5), so calling it a KOI encoding just because it encodes the Russian alphabet seems a bit of a stretch. In any case, I'm removing it until / unless someone can adequately source ISO-IR-153 (rather than GOST 19768-74 or ISO-IR-111) being referred to as KOI8-E in any notable context. -- HarJIT (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

---

The historical preamble to ECMA 113-1988 seems to explain what is going on.

In brief: ECMA 113-1988, noted as being equivalent to ISO 8859-5, is noted to be in conformance with GOST 19768-1987, which is presumably what ISO-IR-153 (being an ISO 8859-5 subset) actually means to cite when it incorrectly lists GOST 19768-74 as one of its source standards. This incompatible change to ECMA 113 is noted as being a result of the GOST standard being revised, i.e. that ECMA 113-1986 (ISO-IR-111) would have been in conformance with GOST 19768-74 / KOI-8, which it is.

I've added an explanation of this to the ISO-IR-111 page (to which KOI8-E was already a redirect, as noted above). -- HarJIT (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]