On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 05:29:41PM +0100, Paul Smith wrote: > >Paul> I agree with you. However, according to the search that I did in > >Paul> the archives of the list, ERTs are not spell-checked, what is > >Paul> surprising. Of course that this LyX's limitation is not serious, > >Paul> as one can always spell-check one's LyX document externally, > >Paul> through aspell (for example) from the command line. > > > >Not spellchecking ERT is intentional, since they are not supposed to > >contain a lot of real words (ideally, they are not supposed to contain > >words at all). > > Jean-Marc, > > Thanks for your answer! I understand your point of view. However, > sometimes, it is unavoidable the use of ERTs containing relevant text. > For instance, I am writing a document in which I use the package > enumerate. To use that package, it seems that it is really necessary (up > to my best knowledge) to use an ERT. Therefore, I would like to submit > to the consideration of LyX team the suggestion of adding a combo (that > the user could tick or not) in order to be possible (to each user) the > choice between spell-checking ERTs and not spell-checking ERTs. In case > my suggestion is too difficult of implementing, please ignore it.
ERT using lots of 'real' text usually can be split into two parts, some 'initial' part, then the big text as normal, and than a 'final' part, often not more than a closing }. This way your text _will_ be spellchecked properly. Andre'
