You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@openoffice.apache.org by Gerrit Schünemann <gs...@web.de> on 2012/08/07 15:43:27 UTC
[DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Hi,
Whilst writing a text today, making a lot of typos, I realized that an
update for the underlining functionality would be a good idea:
It would be a nice feature if the misspelled word wasn't just
underlined, but the difference to the nearest word from the dictionary
was marked (maybe different colour underlining or different style).
What is the general thought on that?
regards
GS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Gerrit Schünemann <gs...@web.de>.
Hi,
[Spellchecker diff-underlining]
On 07.08.2012 15:48, Maurice Howe wrote:
> Wouldn't that not only cause clutter but increase operating overhead?
I suppose that strongly depends on the implementation. Lets say in the
respective positions, the underlining is changed from curly red to
zig-zag, or a different colour..I think many options are possible
without running into clutter.
The operation overhead is not there, the normal "right click, change
word to suggestion" function remains.
For me it's just so often that I think: Now, where did I actually make
the typo? Just to make the same mistake again the next day.
regards
GS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Maurice Howe <ma...@stny.rr.com>.
Wouldn't that not only cause clutter but increase operating overhead?
Maurice Howe
Experience is the thing you have left when everything else is gone.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gerrit Schünemann [mailto:gsnewsletter@web.de]
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 9:43 AM
To: ooo-users@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Hi,
Whilst writing a text today, making a lot of typos, I realized that an
update for the underlining functionality would be a good idea:
It would be a nice feature if the misspelled word wasn't just underlined,
but the difference to the nearest word from the dictionary was marked (maybe
different colour underlining or different style).
What is the general thought on that?
regards
GS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2437/5183 - Release Date: 08/07/12
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Dan <el...@gmail.com>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:42 AM, Gerrit Schünemann <gs...@web.de> wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>>> My thought is that underlining is sufficient. An article in the Sunday NY Times (5 August) entitled
>>> "Auto Crrect Ths" examines reasons that this would be a bad idea. If the writer is unsure of the word
>>> or its spelling, he can always go to Artha and look it up. (Artha offers various suggestions if the
>>> word is misspelled.)
>>
>> If I may quote the article:
>>
>> "One more thing to worry about: the better Autocorrect gets, the more we will come to rely on it. It’s
>> happening already. People who yesterday unlearned arithmetic will soon forget how to spell. One by one we
>> are outsourcing our mental functions to the global prosthetic brain. "
>>
>> That is just what I mean to say. A word is underlined because it's misspelled. You right click on it and
>> accept the suggestion. And you learn next to nothing. If you just had a marker telling you, where the
>> mistake was made, that would be different.
>
> I wonder if there is another way to turn spell checking into a learning experience. Might it be possible,
> via an extension, to monitor all words that are flagged as wrong by the spell checker and corrected by the
> user, and then give a report to the user of the most-frequently misspelled words? If this report was run,
> say monthly, then you could print that as flashcards or upload to a repetitive drilling app, even a mobile
> phone version.
>
> OK. Perhaps not as attractive to adult native speakers. But it could be useful for younger students as
> well as language learners of all ages.
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> While it is true that you can look it up using Artha (not to think about usability), you can also look it
>> up in the suggestions. But you still have to check letter by letter at which point you did a mistake,
>> which is quite time consuming on long words.
Rob has a point. It all depends upon how one uses the spell checking function. For those who
use it as a crutch and don't want to learn how to spell better, that is all it will do. For those of us who
use it to improve ours, we learn as we go. We are even likely to check a dictionary (book, program on one's
computer, or online). Then we create a user dictionary of our own with the correct spelling for words not
found in the built-in dictionary. This is what I do.
It all boils down to what we ask of our spell checking function. If we ask ourselves and answer what
good can we get from using it to make us a better communicator, we will get one result. If we ask, what is the
least amount of work do we have to do when using it, we get another result. We will also have more wrongly
misspelled words in our writings.
I have seen posts complaining about not being able to spell check more than one language in a document.
Wrong question: "Why can't I .... ?" A better question: "How can I ... ?" [The answer to the latter is learn
to apply styles to words from different languages in a document. Whether they are paragraph or character
styles depends upon the circumstances.] The spell checker can be quite useful is we are curious enough to ask
how to do it.
"My 2 cents"
--Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:42 AM, Gerrit Schünemann <gs...@web.de> wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> My thought is that underlining is sufficient. An article in the
>> Sunday NY Times (5 August) entitled "Auto Crrect Ths" examines
>> reasons that this would be a bad idea. If the writer is unsure of
>> the word or its spelling, he can always go to Artha and look it
>> up. (Artha offers various suggestions if the word is misspelled.)
>
> If I may quote the article:
>
> "One more thing to worry about: the better Autocorrect gets, the more we
> will come to rely on it. It’s happening already. People who yesterday
> unlearned arithmetic will soon forget how to spell. One by one we are
> outsourcing our mental functions to the global prosthetic brain. "
>
> That is just what I mean to say. A word is underlined because it's
> misspelled. You right click on it and accept the suggestion. And you
> learn next to nothing. If you just had a marker telling you, where the
> mistake was made, that would be different.
I wonder if there is another way to turn spell checking into a
learning experience. Might it be possible, via an extension, to
monitor all words that are flagged as wrong by the spell checker and
corrected by the user, and then give a report to the user of the
most-frequently misspelled words? If this report was run, say
monthly, then you could print that as flashcards or upload to a
repetitive drilling app, even a mobile phone version.
OK. Perhaps not as attractive to adult native speakers. But it could
be useful for younger students as well as language learners of all
ages.
-Rob
> While it is true that you can look it up using Artha (not to think about
> usability), you can also look it up in the suggestions. But you still
> have to check letter by letter at which point you did a mistake, which
> is quite time consuming on long words.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Dale Erwin <da...@casaerwin.org>.
On 8/8/2012 3:42 AM, Gerrit Schünemann wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> My thought is that underlining is sufficient. An article in the
>> Sunday NY Times (5 August) entitled "Auto Crrect Ths" examines
>> reasons that this would be a bad idea. If the writer is unsure of
>> the word or its spelling, he can always go to Artha and look it
>> up. (Artha offers various suggestions if the word is misspelled.)
>
> If I may quote the article:
>
> "One more thing to worry about: the better Autocorrect gets, the more we
> will come to rely on it. It’s happening already. People who yesterday
> unlearned arithmetic will soon forget how to spell. One by one we are
> outsourcing our mental functions to the global prosthetic brain. "
>
> That is just what I mean to say. A word is underlined because it's
> misspelled. You right click on it and accept the suggestion. And you
> learn next to nothing. If you just had a marker telling you, where the
> mistake was made, that would be different.
> While it is true that you can look it up using Artha (not to think about
> usability), you can also look it up in the suggestions. But you still
> have to check letter by letter at which point you did a mistake, which
> is quite time consuming on long words.
I like spell-check because I make lots of typos not because I don't know
how to spell. Just showing me the misspelled word is sufficient. Of
course even that doesn't prevent all mistakes. Many times my typos
result in a different word but not a misspelled word.
--
Dale Erwin
Lurigancho, Lima 15 PERU
http://leather.casaerwin.org
http://neapolitan.casaerwin.org
=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 9.0.0.909, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20340)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Gerrit Schünemann <gs...@web.de>.
Hi.
> My thought is that underlining is sufficient. An article in the
> Sunday NY Times (5 August) entitled "Auto Crrect Ths" examines
> reasons that this would be a bad idea. If the writer is unsure of
> the word or its spelling, he can always go to Artha and look it
> up. (Artha offers various suggestions if the word is misspelled.)
If I may quote the article:
"One more thing to worry about: the better Autocorrect gets, the more we
will come to rely on it. It’s happening already. People who yesterday
unlearned arithmetic will soon forget how to spell. One by one we are
outsourcing our mental functions to the global prosthetic brain. "
That is just what I mean to say. A word is underlined because it's
misspelled. You right click on it and accept the suggestion. And you
learn next to nothing. If you just had a marker telling you, where the
mistake was made, that would be different.
While it is true that you can look it up using Artha (not to think about
usability), you can also look it up in the suggestions. But you still
have to check letter by letter at which point you did a mistake, which
is quite time consuming on long words.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Doug <dm...@optonline.net>.
On 08/07/2012 09:43 AM, Gerrit Schünemann wrote:
> Hi,
> Whilst writing a text today, making a lot of typos, I realized that an
> update for the underlining functionality would be a good idea:
>
> It would be a nice feature if the misspelled word wasn't just
> underlined, but the difference to the nearest word from the dictionary
> was marked (maybe different colour underlining or different style).
>
> What is the general thought on that?
>
> regards
> GS
>
My thought is that underlining is sufficient. An article in the
Sunday NY Times (5 August) entitled "Auto Crrect Ths" examines
reasons that this would be a bad idea. If the writer is unsure of
the word or its spelling, he can always go to Artha and look it
up. (Artha offers various suggestions if the word is misspelled.)
The Times article is available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/opinion/sunday/auto-correct-this.html?pagewanted=all
--doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Martin Groenescheij <Ma...@Groenescheij.COM>.
On 8/08/2012 7:45 AM, Dale Erwin wrote:
> On 8/7/2012 8:43 AM, Gerrit Schünemann wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Whilst writing a text today, making a lot of
>> typos, I realized that an
>> update for the underlining functionality would
>> be a good idea:
>>
>> It would be a nice feature if the misspelled
>> word wasn't just
>> underlined, but the difference to the nearest
>> word from the dictionary
>> was marked (maybe different colour underlining
>> or different style).
>>
>> What is the general thought on that?
>
>
> I would like sometimes to be able to turn off
> even the underlining. I do a lot of work using
> more than one language in the same text. So
> far, I've not been able to find a way to handle
> that with the current spell-checking function.
>
> I do like the spell-checking function. I find
> it a real help, but I feel that the underlining
> is sufficient for me to see my errors... in most
> instances. I write many documents in English
> concerning the Neapolitan language. When a page
> has from 1/3 to 2/3 of all the words underlined,
> with maybe only one or two words that are
> actually misspelled, it doesn't help much.
>
> Is it possible to turn this off but only for
> certain documents?
At the Standard Toolbar there are two Icons *ABC*
with a check-mark and *ABC* with a curly underline
which switch spell checking on and off.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Dan <el...@gmail.com>.
Dale Erwin wrote:
> On 8/7/2012 8:43 AM, Gerrit Schünemann wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Whilst writing a text today, making a lot of typos, I realized that an
>> update for the underlining functionality would be a good idea:
>>
>> It would be a nice feature if the misspelled word wasn't just
>> underlined, but the difference to the nearest word from the dictionary
>> was marked (maybe different colour underlining or different style).
>>
>> What is the general thought on that?
>
>
> I would like sometimes to be able to turn off even the underlining. I do a lot of work
> using more than one language in the same text. So far, I've not been able to find a way
> to handle that with the current spell-checking function.
>
> I do like the spell-checking function. I find it a real help, but I feel that the
> underlining is sufficient for me to see my errors... in most instances. I write many
> documents in English concerning the Neapolitan language. When a page has from 1/3 to 2/3
> of all the words underlined, with maybe only one or two words that are actually
> misspelled, it doesn't help much.
>
> Is it possible to turn this off but only for certain documents?
>
To turn off the spell-checking function, click the tool that has an ABC with a wavy
line under it.
You can spell check a document containing more than one language if you use styles:
paragraph or character styles. However, you must have a dictionary installed each of the
languages you are using. If your document contains paragraphs of a language, you can
select that language in a new paragraph style and apply the style to those paragraphs. If
you are using more than one language in a single paragraph, create a new character style
for each language. Then apply the new style to individual words of that language.
Get the Writer Guide for instructions. It contains three chapters on styles.Get it here:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/PublicationsDan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Posted by Dale Erwin <da...@casaerwin.org>.
On 8/7/2012 8:43 AM, Gerrit Schünemann wrote:
> Hi,
> Whilst writing a text today, making a lot of typos, I realized that an
> update for the underlining functionality would be a good idea:
>
> It would be a nice feature if the misspelled word wasn't just
> underlined, but the difference to the nearest word from the dictionary
> was marked (maybe different colour underlining or different style).
>
> What is the general thought on that?
I would like sometimes to be able to turn off even the underlining. I
do a lot of work using more than one language in the same text. So far,
I've not been able to find a way to handle that with the current
spell-checking function.
I do like the spell-checking function. I find it a real help, but I
feel that the underlining is sufficient for me to see my errors... in
most instances. I write many documents in English concerning the
Neapolitan language. When a page has from 1/3 to 2/3 of all the words
underlined, with maybe only one or two words that are actually
misspelled, it doesn't help much.
Is it possible to turn this off but only for certain documents?
--
Dale Erwin
Lurigancho, Lima 15 PERU
http://leather.casaerwin.org
http://neapolitan.casaerwin.org
=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 9.0.0.909, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20330)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-help@incubator.apache.org