<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - Rework auto-correction mechanisms for better UX" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139397#c6">Comment # 6</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - Rework auto-correction mechanisms for better UX" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139397">bug 139397</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:telesto@surfxs.nl" title="Telesto <telesto@surfxs.nl>"> Telesto</a> <pre>(In reply to V Stuart Foote from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=139397#c5">comment #5</a>) > Presently, the entire list is subject to user customization--a user can > delete any LO provided default entries they find inappropriate, and may add > any mnemonic for string replacements they find useful. First off noting that editing the replacement list currently broken (in various ways, depending on language): <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - AutoCorrect: After Removal of Replacement Entry the Replacement Itself is still Performed." href="show_bug.cgi?id=96787">bug 96787</a>, <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Deleting entry's in the AutoCorrect Word Completion has no effect on the tooltip suggestion" href="show_bug.cgi?id=119177">bug 119177</a>, <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - AutoCorrect deleting an item in the German replacement list in the dialog doesn't have any actual effect (still replaced). Even after restart" href="show_bug.cgi?id=139396">bug 139396</a> But well those are bugs will be fixed someday. So not a reference Remains what <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED WONTFIX - AutoCorrect in LO-Writer changes as from version 7.0.4.1 forcibly “daß” (traditional German spelling rules) to “dass” (reformed German spelling rules)" href="show_bug.cgi?id=139377">bug 139377</a> expressed related to daß and dass. Any replacement lis taking sides.. and is installed by default. Which for my taste is a kind of 'problematic'. In the sense of LibreOffice is answering linguistic questions. By saying 'dass' being proper (in line with reform of 1996). Which isn't forced upon the user. Wikipedia writes that there plenty of standards for different papers (but no clue if this still being valid; kind of dated wiki page) So the whole replacement thing bit hairy to me. No clear if there are clear rules for dictionary maintainers. If something should be added to replacement list/when not etc. The list appears to be kind of subjective. And it's enabled by default. Not much against smiley's. Which I even consider being separated from 'normal' replacements (but possibly my preference + and obviously development effort). So not sure how realistic this is. And of course the opposite. The usefulness in general. So people expecting this to happen. I personally dislike auto-replacements (without any feedback). Auto-correct correcting wrongly is pretty infuriating. And if you don't realize its caused by auto-correct.. And auto-correct is kind of buried. So I personally don't associate auto-correct with replacement list. I might even read Auto-correct as being about the spell-checker. So yes, I admit the possibility of editing partly solves the issue. But you need to be aware.. I no, I didn't know at first, nor did the reporter in bug 139377. It also shows how infuriating this can be. Exactly the same topic at play with 'markdown' [sorry keep bring this up]. Trying to type a directory path is kind of a thing. Or wanting to accentuate something with *HELLO* (without being bold) Which again a hidden feature (or annoyance, depending on perspective). And the speculating about how large group are seeing this as (feature) or (annoyance) is not obvious. And kind of dislike the way it forced up on someone. The topic of 'needing' development effort. Certainly not unique. So closing because it needs development effort as isn't real argument for some 'change'. If we can come up with something. Development effort means to me.. well priority.. so lots of effort with present long list of other more pressing issue.. ends up with LOW ENHANCEMENT. Still OK with that :P I personally perceive it as recognition that sometime could be improved. Even if this factual means no change in the upcoming 5, maybe 10 years :-). But it's taken seriously but not seen as most pressing matter. It might be bit more sentimental compared to certain pragmatism. The pragmatic will reason: this won't be fixed anytime soon. Not extremely pressing, and we enough to do already. So let it vanish of the radar (and not 'bloating' the bug tracker any further) While I would argue; it has a tremendous size already; are we picky on small selection of bugs.. :-). And really wrong to say, well this could be improved with some kind of direction. If there is no realistic options doing it differently, closing is obviously the decision to make. [Sorry for the long read]. I think I ruined this report already, making it to long.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>