RGB ES wrote:
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
That makes sense, the spell checker works very well e
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 :
> Hi Robert, *,
>
> I'm not very deep i
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,
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://wik
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.documentfounda
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 pr
