I am using UUIDs, but they are not particularly nice to read, write and communicate. So I would like to encode them. I could use base64, or base32, but they would not be easy anyway: base64 has capitalized letters and symbols. Base32 is a bit better, but you can still obtain clumsy stuff.
I was wondering if there's a nice and clean way to encode a number into palatable phonemes, so to achieve better readability and hopefully a bit of compression.
On
Bubble babble and base32 are inefficient, especially in your case. I suggest that you make your own algorithm. Since there are 20 consonants and 6 vowels (including 'y') you can have approx. 20*6*2+6*6=276 consonant/vowel-vowel/consonant pairs. So every byte of your number can be represented by a pair. With a bit of tweaking your algorithm could produce pronounceable words much shorter than bubble babble. You could even play dice and replace all odd digits with a consonant/vowel. For example, 0123456789ABCDEF (hex) encodes to ABECIDOFUGYHKRM. 3141592654 (dec) encodes to HHIA-ROIR. You are left with ten spare consonants which can be paired with vowels to replace some double consonants etc.
On
If all you want is a way to communicate hex values readably (ie, over the phone, or when instructing someone verbally what to type), then I suggest you use one of the various phonetic alphabets, such as the NATO Phonetic Alphabet or the US Army/Navy Phonetic Alphabet.
In the latter, the letters A-F are spoken as "able", "baker", "charlie", "dog", "easy", and "fox", respectively, so you would read the hex sequence "3fd2cc0e" as "three fox dog two charlie charlie zero easy". A uuid would be read out in exactly the same fashion.
On
Why not use something similar to what PGP does to create readable keys, simply find a nice list of words that are distinctive, lets say you're using 128 bit UUID's, a list of 256 words (2^8) means 16 words.
Stupid question but why are people reading/writing UUID's/etc. with respect to your application?
On
and hopefully a bit of compression
Not sure exactly what you mean there; making something "readable" or "pronouncable" will inevitably expand the space required for it. Maybe you meant "hopefully a bit of redundancy"? It would be good if, even if the user makes a small mistake, the system can detect and perhaps even correct it.
Really it depends very much on how big your UUIDs are and how they are most often communicated. If they need to be communicated over phone or VoIP, you want more audible redundancy. If they need to be entered into mobile devices with numeric keypads, it tends to be difficult to enter alphabetic characters, moreso if they are case-sensitive. If they are written down a lot, you need to worry about characters that look similar (O and 0 and o, for instance). If they need to be memorised, then probably strings of real words are the best (have a look at the PGP Word List).
However I think a great all-round solution is just using numberic digits. They're a lot harder to confuse with each other (both when spoken and written) than some alphabetic characters. Easy to enter on mobile devices, and people aren't too bad at memorising numbers.
And the length of the string is not too bad either. Let's compare base32 with base 10 (decimal). The length of a decimal string is log_10(32) times the length of the corresponding base32 string, or about 1.5 times as long. Ten characters of base32 correspond to 15 decimal digits.
Not much of a penalty, IMO, seeing as in base 32 it's easy to confuse C and T, or S, F and X (when spoken), and someone speaking with a foreign accent is more likely to cause trouble.
On
S/KEY uses a dictionary of 2048 words to map 64 bit numbers to a sequence of 6 predefined words/syllables. (People will always find swear words if they are looking for them ;) )
On
Urbit's phonetic naming system wasn't mentioned yet. It uses 3 characters for 8 bits, 6 for 16, so it's less efficient than Proquint or Bubble Babble, but more divisible.
On
This question is very old; interestingly, as old as the solution I'm about to present, but it hasn't been mentioned here yet.
It's Proquint. Similar to Bubble Babble, but the differences make the results easier to read, in my opinion.
Here's how it works, from their documentation:
In sum, we propose encoding a 16-bit string as a proquint [PRO-nouncable QUINT-uplet] of alternating consonants and vowels as follows.
Four-bits as a consonant:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F b d f g h j k l m n p r s t v zTwo-bits as a vowel:
0 1 2 3 a i o uWhole 16-bit word, where "con" = consonant, "vo" = vowel:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |con |vo |con |vo |con | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+Separate proquints using dashes, which can go un-pronounced or be pronounced "eh". The suggested optional magic number prefix to a sequence of proquints is "0q-".
Here are some IP dotted-quads and their corresponding proquints.
127.0.0.1 lusab-babad 63.84.220.193 gutih-tugad 63.118.7.35 gutuk-bisog 140.98.193.141 mudof-sakat 64.255.6.200 haguz-biram 128.30.52.45 mabiv-gibot 147.67.119.2 natag-lisaf 212.58.253.68 tibup-zujah 216.35.68.215 tobog-higil 216.68.232.21 todah-vobij 198.81.129.136 sinid-makam 12.110.110.204 budov-kuras
Bubble Babble is a good one to try. It generates nonsensical but readable output like: