<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/">
</head>
<body><span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:vstuart.foote@utsa.edu" title="V Stuart Foote <vstuart.foote@utsa.edu>"> <span class="fn">V Stuart Foote</span></a>
</span> changed
<a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED WONTFIX - spellcheck to indicate a spelling as rare thus usage to be confirmed"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90006">bug 90006</a>
<br>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>What</th>
<th>Removed</th>
<th>Added</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Status</td>
<td>NEW
</td>
<td>RESOLVED
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">CC</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>vstuart.foote@utsa.edu
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Resolution</td>
<td>---
</td>
<td>WONTFIX
</td>
</tr></table>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED WONTFIX - spellcheck to indicate a spelling as rare thus usage to be confirmed"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90006#c6">Comment # 6</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED WONTFIX - spellcheck to indicate a spelling as rare thus usage to be confirmed"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90006">bug 90006</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:vstuart.foote@utsa.edu" title="V Stuart Foote <vstuart.foote@utsa.edu>"> <span class="fn">V Stuart Foote</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Nick Levinson from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=90006#c5">comment #5</a>)
<span class="quote">>
> I think this can be done by adding a Boolean (true/false) field to every
> entry in every dictionary. The default entry would be false (as in 'false
> spelling'). But if a user could supply a file of rare-but-correct spellings
> or could edit a single entry, the status of true would mean 'true spelling
> albeit rare'.
>
> That leaves how the UI should inform users of likely-misapplied rare
> spellings.
>
> An extension would seem appropriate for the UI once the rarities are
> recognizable but probably not to the necessary hooks in LibreOffice,
> especially the additional field. Since the hooks would need something in LO
> itself, I'm restoring this report's status.</span >
Way out of scope for the way our bundled dictionaries/thesaurus are produced
and maintained. Have a look at the Hunspell, and Lightproof projects and
restrictions on how word lists can be altered.
The "User-defined dictionaries" model Heiko described provides framework for
customized (individually or by some collaborative work group) lexical aids
without imposing a non-maintainable data structure of alternates.
Presently the LanguageTool.org project provided extension supports rules based
checking--one can write their own for their custom dictionary needs.
If the Grammarly project ever spins up an extension for AOO/LO that would be a
treat for using its "context-optimized word choice" but again these are
extensions and not something applicable to LibreOffice core, and hooks
extension authors need for GUI interface are provided in the SDK.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>