[Issue 93876] spellcheck phrase when part should fail otherwise

[bu...@apache.org]

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=93876

Nicole Ballman <nb...@my.fit.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |nballman2012@my.fit.edu

--- Comment #7 from Nicole Ballman <nb...@my.fit.edu> ---
(In reply to Edwin Sharp from comment #5)
> I fail to understand this and doubt if this issue is meaningful.

"Stare decisis" is a word that is part is a specific lexicon, so it is
difficult to see why the error is meaningful as you are unlikely to use
"decisis" without "stare" preceding it. 

But with a more common word, take "per se," this is a little more problematic.
"Se" is not a word, but "per se" is.  However, it isn't hard to imagine someone
making the typo "Se went to the store," when you really mean "She went to the
store." Writer does not count this as a spelling error if you were to add "per
se" to the dictionary because it seems to take "per" and "se" as separate
additions to the dictionary.

I tried this out in Microsoft Word to compare, and while adding "per se" to the
dictionary resulted in "per" and "se" being separate entries--and therefore
"se" on its own not being counted as a spelling error--Word was able to pick
out in it's grammar check that I probably meant "She went to the store." 

Writer, on the other hand does not have an internal grammar checker, and so
that error would go unnoticed. 

Some other words compounded with a space that may pose a similar problem
include: "terra firma," "ad hoc," and "per capita."

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
You are the assignee for the issue.
You are watching all issue changes.