https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47896

--- Comment #13 from Trond Trosterud <[email protected]> ---
This is an important issue. My background is the following: I develop proofing
tools for morphologically complex languages. What I thus want is that LO is
able to handle any language with a speaker community active enough to cooperate
with me or (needless to say) with anyone else with an infrastructure for making
LO proofing tools. Some of these attempts will result in good and welcome
proofing tools, others will not, and it is hard to tell on beforehand. I thus
suggest LO operats with __two__ language lists:
1. a short list of the most common languages (approximately today's list, or
perhaps shortened to 100 languages or even fewer, e.g. to the ones coming with
preinstalled tools)
2. a backlist containing the entire ISO 639-3.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_639-3). Users (and developers) interested in
other languages than the short list will find their language in the long list.
Getting from the short to the long list should be easy (e.g. >More languages at
the beginning and end of the shortlist, or whatever)

Someone on this thread asked what MS Word does this. How much I hate to admit
it, rumors have it that W8 is actually better than us in this respect, in
having a solution along the lines sketched here. If the rumors are true, this
is a paradox, since adding proofing tools to the closed MS requires the
approval of MS or some of its subcontractors, whereas we being __open__ should
capitalise on that, and have an open list of languages for proofing tool
additions.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

Reply via email to