Re: [tdf-discuss] Need for more compound words for spellcheck dictionary.
RGB ES wrote: AFAIK, LibO dictionaries are the same dictionaries from OOo. If you have a custom dictionary where you added the words you miss, you can import (I mean, copy to the right location) that dictionary into LibO user profile. See here for more details about the user profile: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/UserProfile 2011/2/20 Robert Derman robert.der...@pressenter.com: One of the reasons, perhaps the main reason I have not upgraded to LO from OpenOffice 3.1 yet is that I dread having to go through the process of adding over a thousand compound words to the spellcheck dictionary. This dictionary has almost NO compound words in it! Does anyone know if this problem has been addressed with LO 3.3. I am using the U.S. English version. If this severe shortcoming has not yet been addressed yet, I think we should do so before version 3.4. My question above appears to have been answered, which leads me to pose the following. I suspect that this may be one of the reasons that businesses continue to stick with MS Office and more particularly MS Word. I have not used Word for quite a while, but from when I did, I remember it having a much better spellcheck dictionary. This is one of the many places where LO needs to do a better job in order to: A. distance itself from OOo, and B. appear to the people who make decisions in businesses as a serious professional grade product, and not just a hobby for software writers with time on their hands. Having a seriously inferior spellcheck dictionary costs time with office workers and thus is in many cases sufficient reason for companies to stay with a proprietary commercial product and shun open source. It leads corporate buyers to believe in the old adage, You get what you pay for. I believe that this is a thing that non-programmers could work on with a little help and guidance from programmers/developers. I don't know this for sure, but perhaps there is even an open source dictionary program or something, or a public domain word list or something that we could utilize that would be better than the very inadequate spelling check word list we borrowed from OOo. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Need for more compound words for spellcheck dictionary.
Hi Robert, *, I'm not very deep involved in spellchecking, but nevertheless trying a shot.. Robert Derman schrieb: RGB ES wrote: AFAIK, LibO dictionaries are the same dictionaries from OOo. If you have a custom dictionary where you added the words you miss, you can import (I mean, copy to the right location) that dictionary into LibO user profile. See here for more details about the user profile: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/UserProfile 2011/2/20 Robert Derman robert.der...@pressenter.com : One of the reasons, perhaps the main reason I have not upgraded to LO from OpenOffice 3.1 yet is that I dread having to go through the process of adding over a thousand compound words to the spellcheck dictionary. This dictionary has almost NO compound words in it! Does anyone know if this problem has been addressed with LO 3.3. I am using the U.S. English version. If this severe shortcoming has not yet been addressed yet, I think we should do so before version 3.4. If I remember well german, dictionary changed to hunspell dictionary engine for that reason. German and many more languages' words are compound words in a very wide range so that problem arose from beginning. Not shure what spellchecking engine is used for english languages spellchecking - I guess it's aspell which has poor support for compound words. But all guessed. Not enough insight in that topic. [.. impact of poor spellchecking ..] Gruß/regards -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images (german version already started) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Need for more compound words for spellcheck dictionary.
AFAIK, hunspell is used for all dictionaries so the problem is not the engine but the dictionary itself: they need to be build around the idea of using compound words and that huge work (it seems) is not complete yet. Ricardo 2011/3/2 Friedrich Strohmaier damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de: Hi Robert, *, I'm not very deep involved in spellchecking, but nevertheless trying a shot.. Robert Derman schrieb: RGB ES wrote: AFAIK, LibO dictionaries are the same dictionaries from OOo. If you have a custom dictionary where you added the words you miss, you can import (I mean, copy to the right location) that dictionary into LibO user profile. See here for more details about the user profile: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/UserProfile 2011/2/20 Robert Derman robert.der...@pressenter.com : One of the reasons, perhaps the main reason I have not upgraded to LO from OpenOffice 3.1 yet is that I dread having to go through the process of adding over a thousand compound words to the spellcheck dictionary. This dictionary has almost NO compound words in it! Does anyone know if this problem has been addressed with LO 3.3. I am using the U.S. English version. If this severe shortcoming has not yet been addressed yet, I think we should do so before version 3.4. If I remember well german, dictionary changed to hunspell dictionary engine for that reason. German and many more languages' words are compound words in a very wide range so that problem arose from beginning. Not shure what spellchecking engine is used for english languages spellchecking - I guess it's aspell which has poor support for compound words. But all guessed. Not enough insight in that topic. [.. impact of poor spellchecking ..] Gruß/regards -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images (german version already started) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Need for more compound words for spellcheck dictionary.
One of the reasons, perhaps the main reason I have not upgraded to LO from OpenOffice 3.1 yet is that I dread having to go through the process of adding over a thousand compound words to the spellcheck dictionary. This dictionary has almost NO compound words in it! Does anyone know if this problem has been addressed with LO 3.3. I am using the U.S. English version. If this severe shortcoming has not yet been addressed yet, I think we should do so before version 3.4. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Need for more compound words for spellcheck dictionary.
AFAIK, LibO dictionaries are the same dictionaries from OOo. If you have a custom dictionary where you added the words you miss, you can import (I mean, copy to the right location) that dictionary into LibO user profile. See here for more details about the user profile: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/UserProfile 2011/2/20 Robert Derman robert.der...@pressenter.com: One of the reasons, perhaps the main reason I have not upgraded to LO from OpenOffice 3.1 yet is that I dread having to go through the process of adding over a thousand compound words to the spellcheck dictionary. This dictionary has almost NO compound words in it! Does anyone know if this problem has been addressed with LO 3.3. I am using the U.S. English version. If this severe shortcoming has not yet been addressed yet, I think we should do so before version 3.4. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
