Subject: Re: localization formats proposal
From: F J Franklin (F.J.Franklin@sheffield.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Jul 18 2001 - 05:19:40 CDT
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Karl Ove Hufthammer wrote:
> on 18 jul 2001 05:46:12, Andrew Dunbar <hippietrail@yahoo.com>:
> > Not really since special dictionaries can only *add* words.
> > Australian English needs to *forbid* words that are legal in
> > American. "color", "favor", "dialog" and tons of others are
> > not legal words.
>
> Ouch, that's more complicated. I guess the *best* (not easiest)
> solution here would be to create separate Australian dictionaries.
It ought to be possible to identify dictionary subsets or rules, such
colo[u]r, optimize/ise, analyse/yze, and so on, and have a method of
choosing how to combine these with defaults based on locale.
The ise/ize is particularly frustrating for me. For Australians it's
always -ise, in the U.S. it's -ize, but here in the U.K. it's `take your
pick', most of the time - so long as you're consistent. Personally I
favour the -ize, but MSWord (for example) insists that this is wrong.
Similarly with focused/focussed - both allowed, provided you're
consistent. (And again MSWord disputes this.)
I would love to have an intelligent dictionary.
Regards, Frank
Francis James Franklin
F.J.Franklin@shef.ac.uk
Their consultation consisted chiefly in propounding and supporting, for
the thousandth time, each his favourite theories.
--- George MacDonald
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Jul 18 2001 - 05:19:43 CDT