LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > LinuxQuestions.org > LQ Suggestions & Feedback
User Name
Password
LQ Suggestions & Feedback Do you have a suggestion for this site or an idea that will make the site better? This forum is for you.
PLEASE READ THIS FORUM - Information and status updates will also be posted here.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 07-13-2005, 12:00 AM   #1
Pcghost
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: The Real Washington
Distribution: Debian, Android
Posts: 1,819

Rep: Reputation: 46
LQ Spellcheck feature


I just noticed that the LQ spell checker doesn't recognize the distro names correctly. Would it be difficult to add the words below to the LQ spellcheck database? I'm sure I forgot a few but you get the idea.

Debian
Ubuntu
Kubuntu
Slackware
Gentoo
Fedora <--Edit: This one clears. It is a hat after all
SuSE
Mandrake <---Edit: This one clears too, it is a root.
Knoppix
Mepis


At least the ones we have forums for? I know that they aren't exactly dictionary words, but they are typed so frequently around here that it would make the spell checker more effective if it didn't tag them as wrong. Just a thought..
 
Old 07-13-2005, 04:32 AM   #2
archtoad6
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Houston, TX (usa)
Distribution: MEPIS, Debian, Knoppix,
Posts: 4,727
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 234Reputation: 234Reputation: 234
Excellent suggestion.

Please don't forget:
- MEPIS
- SimplyMEPIS
- SUSE
- Mandriva
- RHEL
- FC


Side note, this isn't the only inconvenient spell checker in captivity. My e-mail provider runs CommuniGate4, & I use its web interface almost exclusively. Unfortunately, it's too big a hassle for the admins to update the dictionary (the bad news). The good news -- I have started accessing my mail & LQ in Konqueror and Konqueror's spell checker works inside the text boxes in both cases. Konqueror's spell checker automatically highlights misspellings on the fly, so all I have to is look for the red words as I am typing & fix the ones that need it.

Writing the above shows that:
- Konqueror
- KPackage
- KDE
as well all the rest of the "K" names need to be added too.

"Gnome" & "GNOME" are acceptable, is this desktop prejudice?
 
Old 07-13-2005, 09:26 AM   #3
jeremy
root
 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 13,556

Rep: Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031
The spellchecker is something we're debating in general for future version of the code. Nice plugins exist for almost every browser and those allow you to maintain your own dictionary. I'd like to get everyones input on this. Do you prefer that we keep the spellchecker or should we be recommending spellbound/iespell/etc. instead?

--jeremy
 
Old 07-13-2005, 09:34 AM   #4
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 262Reputation: 262Reputation: 262
Quote:
Originally posted by jeremy
The spellchecker is something we're debating in general for future version of the code. Nice plugins exist for almost every browser and those allow you to maintain your own dictionary. I'd like to get everyones input on this. Do you prefer that we keep the spellchecker or should we be recommending spellbound/iespell/etc. instead?

--jeremy
I vote we keep it so there won't be any excuse for those who horribly misspell not to use it in their posts, since I'm sure those that misspell on purpose probably won't be keeping track of their own spellchecker..
 
Old 07-13-2005, 10:23 AM   #5
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 3,178
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
I say get rid of it. It has never really cured the bad spellers and makes no difference to the good ones.

I always use the KDE Dictionary if I have any doubts about spelling or use the very useful dictionary.com site to check.

Actually if you connect to a remote spellchecker/dictionary server like dictionary.com or dict.org it would be better. Why not just convert the current spellcheck button to a link to an external spellchecker. There are many sites that do this for free. Why waste LQ's resources to do something that is so commonly available?

For example I do this on my site. I use the SpellingCow spell checker which connects to a remote server.

The only thing you need to worry about is privacy, but then when you're submitting messages in a public web forum, what is the privacy concern when it's available for the whole world to see anyway?

Last edited by vharishankar; 07-13-2005 at 10:27 AM.
 
Old 07-13-2005, 10:50 AM   #6
archtoad6
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Houston, TX (usa)
Distribution: MEPIS, Debian, Knoppix,
Posts: 4,727
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 234Reputation: 234Reputation: 234
Quote:
Originally posted by trickykid
I vote we keep it so there won't be any excuse for those who horribly misspell not to use it in their posts, since I'm sure those that misspell on purpose probably won't be keeping track of their own spellchecker..
I agree: Keep it, it can't hurt. I do wish there were an easy way to address the original issue: customizing the dictionary. (BTW, "distro" ...)

Quote:
Originally posted by jeremy
... Do you prefer that we keep the spellchecker or should we be recommending spellbound/iespell/etc. instead?

--jeremy
Why is this an either/or? Can we not keep the current spell checker and recommend something for those who want finer control over their word lists? As long as it continues to not intrude on those, like me, who use their own, what harm does it do?

One reason to keep it: It would be great if everything inside certain tags, e.g. [QUOTE], [CODE], & [URL] at a minimum, were left unchecked. I think that is something that would be easiest done server-side, & what a breakthrough!

Above written before seeing Harishankar's post, further thoughts:

The question of resources is one that crossed my mind, but I didn't originally raise. So what resources does the spell checker use?

In addition to the possibility of having a tag context aware spell checker, another argument for keeping some form of spell check is that sometimes we log in here from a different box and don't have our normal home environments.

Last edited by archtoad6; 07-13-2005 at 10:59 AM.
 
Old 07-13-2005, 11:39 AM   #7
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 3,178
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
I agree: Keep it, it can't hurt. I do wish there were an easy way to address the original issue: customizing the dictionary. (BTW, "distro" ...)
I'm thinking in terms of the server admin. It can hurt performance especially if there are many people using it. Full-Text Searching and Spellcheck/Dictionary features can load your server like nothing else especially with the kind of traffic that LQ gets.

Of course, LQ may be hosted on a very powerful server and all that, but I'm still not the kind of person who likes to see wasted resources, especially if there are so many sites offering the same services for free.
 
Old 07-13-2005, 11:59 AM   #8
Matir
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 8,507

Rep: Reputation: 128Reputation: 128
If the spellchecker is removed in the future, might I propose that the FAQs have links to spellchecking plugins/extensions for various common browsers, so that we might point those who are spelling deficient in that direction?
 
Old 07-13-2005, 01:10 PM   #9
Pcghost
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: The Real Washington
Distribution: Debian, Android
Posts: 1,819

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 46
I would suggest keeping it. Sum uv us cannt spll to save are lifes. But if it is a resources issue, then I can understand wanting to ditch it. It would be cool to have personalized dictionaries, but the above words are typed by everyone in the forums at some point or another.
 
Old 07-13-2005, 08:20 PM   #10
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 262Reputation: 262Reputation: 262
Another reason I say keep it is that I feel no one should be forced to use third party software to use LQ.org. Being a moderator, I know for a fact I'm not the only moderator who dings members that spell horribly to clean up their posts, especially after other members complain. I think having the feature available is an easier way to get these such members to use it when it does come to that point that it has to be dealt with.
 
Old 07-13-2005, 10:13 PM   #11
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 3,178
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally posted by trickykid
Another reason I say keep it is that I feel no one should be forced to use third party software to use LQ.org. Being a moderator, I know for a fact I'm not the only moderator who dings members that spell horribly to clean up their posts, especially after other members complain. I think having the feature available is an easier way to get these such members to use it when it does come to that point that it has to be dealt with.
A few questions
  1. Is spellcheck really that important to justify having your own spellcheck server?
  2. Is it considered bad netiquette to pick on members merely because of their bad spelling? (think of all those non-native English users who use this site).
  3. Does the current spellcheck really have that much of an impact to cut down all those errors?
My answers are: no, yes and no respectively. Therefore I felt it was wasteful having spellcheck built right into LQ when there are so many sites that are dedicated to it and furthermore can be easily linked from here.

Spellcheck is not a required feature. It's an optional one and I don't see where LQ is forcing users to use third party software... after all people can check spelling using a local desktop software as much as they can use a third party site.

Last edited by vharishankar; 07-13-2005 at 10:15 PM.
 
Old 07-13-2005, 11:55 PM   #12
Matir
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 8,507

Rep: Reputation: 128Reputation: 128
Out of curiousity, can anyone direct me to a FF extension that will do spellcheck on forms?
 
Old 07-13-2005, 11:59 PM   #13
jeremy
root
 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 13,556

Rep: Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031Reputation: 4031
http://spellbound.sourceforge.net/

--jeremy
 
Old 07-14-2005, 12:12 AM   #14
Matir
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 8,507

Rep: Reputation: 128Reputation: 128
Doh. Somehow I missed that. Definitely didn't show up on the FF extensions page. Thanks Jeremy!
 
Old 07-14-2005, 02:17 AM   #15
scuzzman
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Hilliard, Ohio, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Kubuntu
Posts: 1,851

Rep: Reputation: 47
I would actually have to agree with TK on this one and say keep it. I, for one, use LQ at work quite often, and am unable to install any third-party software on the computer - I'd be lost without a spell checker simply to fix my typos. Also, I occasionally browse LQ using Lynx, and there is no spell-check extension for it - though, I feel as though I'm in the minority there
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SpellCheck Module [PX]Kal Bob LQ Suggestions & Feedback 1 04-18-2004 02:10 AM
kword spellcheck DC_Tsunami Linux - Software 4 04-07-2004 02:23 AM
openoffice spellcheck humanveal Linux - Software 3 09-09-2002 08:53 PM
SpellCheck tarballedtux LQ Suggestions & Feedback 1 04-05-2002 08:44 AM
Spellcheck jeremy LQ Suggestions & Feedback 1 09-17-2001 02:14 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > LinuxQuestions.org > LQ Suggestions & Feedback

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration