On Thu, 15 Sep 2011, F Wolff wrote:
> I expressed myself badly. What I meant was: in the two other non-English
> languages I write in, missing words is a somewhat frequent problem with
> the spell checkers, simply because the spell checkers aren't as good as
> the English ones. From "our side" it seems as if the English ones
> (either of Hunspell or Aspell) works really well, since it almost never
> has any missing words (maybe because I'm also writing as a second
> language speaker with reduced vocabulary). So while I know that
> suggestion quality is an important part of making a good spell checker,
> I'm not sure that suggestion quality alone will convince people who are
> used to evaluating a spell checker based on the missing words.
You should not evaluate a spell checker engine based on missing words,
that is a function of the dictionary used and not the spell checker
engine.
Received on Thu Sep 15 08:51:09 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 15 2011 - 08:51:09 CEST