Subject: no locale fallbacks for dictionaries (was Re: Commit: fix that spelling + images bug)
From: Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com)
Date: Sat Mar 24 2001 - 17:23:58 CST
At 03:38 PM 3/24/01 -0000, Tomas Frydrych wrote:
>I disagree. If a sentence is written in British English, then under no
>circumstances should we try to check it with a US dictionary. If
>you get a British document, then 'colour' is right and 'color' is
>mispelled; it has nothing to do with Dom's (or anyone else's)
>preferences for US spelling over UK one. If one needs to rewrite a
>document someone else wrote in the UK to follow US conventions
>(although why they would want to do that escapes me, since it is
>not their original piece of work!), they have to change the language
>from en-GB to en-US first, then they will get to see all the
>squiggles they need, so that they can make any changes they
>want to. If you do not follow this procedure, you will either get (1)
>pieces of text marked as written in en-GB but spelled with US
>convetions, or, (2) a document made of random mixture of en-GB
>and en-US bits. Both of these alternatives, goes without saying (I
>hope), are unacceptable.
I stand corrected.
NOTE -- This also implies that if we get an document of unmixed en-GB
content, and only have an en-US dictionary available (the current case),
then we shouldn't spell-check that document *at all*, rather than misapply
the best available dictionary.
I presume that Tomas is OK with this. Is everyone else? If not, what's a
better proposal?
Thanks,
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat Mar 24 2001 - 17:20:06 CST