Possible bug in en_GB .AFF file?

["Marco A.G.Pinto" <ma...@mail.telepac.pt>]

Hello!

I am getting ready to release tonight the en_GB speller forked by me.

I am confused because the code "O" appears both as SFX and PFX:
*PFX O Y 1**
**PFX O 0 non- . *

*SFX O Y 12**
**SFX O 0 l a **
**SFX O e al [^bcgv]e **
**SFX O e ial [bcgv]e **
**SFX O 0 ial [bcrx] **
**SFX O um al um **
**SFX O 0 al [^u]m **
**SFX O y al ty **
**SFX O y ial [^t]y **
**SFX O 0 ual [px]t **
**SFX O 0 tal [iu]t **
**SFX O 0 al [^ipux]t **
**SFX O 0 al [^aebcrtxmy]*

Is this a bug in the .AFF?

Which one should be used?

Thanks!

Kind regards,
         >Marco A.G.Pinto
           ------------------------

Re: Possible bug in en_GB .AFF file?

["Marco A.G.Pinto" <ma...@mail.telepac.pt>]

Hello Kevin,

After writing my e-mail I improved my tool to allow using codes both for 
prefix and suffix: http://i.imgur.com/XrBGgyX.jpg

This, because the "O" code as a prefix adds "non-".

If you see the screenshot, it now makes sense:
non-fiction (prefix)
fictional (suffix)

ahhhh... I am in the right path!

Thanks!

Kind regards,
       >Marco A.G.Pinto
         -----------------------


On 31/10/2013 11:23, Kevin Scannell wrote:
> Yes, I'd assign a new flag to one of the two.  The good news is that
> only one word in the .dic file seems to use the "O" flag:
>
> fiction/MSOo
>
> at least in the version I'm looking at.   Just add the newly created
> flag to this one word and behavior should be unchanged.
>
> Kevin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: l10n-help@openoffice.apache.org