Spell checkers
Oct. 16th, 2008 12:21 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackWould it be worth having an "unlikely" mark for a spelling checker? For those occasions when it's entirely possible you did mean "licens (n, ceremonial greek fireplace)"[1], but it's overwhelmingly more likely you meant the common word "license"?
It would have to be visually represented as not requiring you to get rid of it, but merely to draw your attention to it, if that's possible. On the other hand, you could argue that's what spelling checkers ought to do anyway, although they are not normally treated like that. At least, "not in dictionary" is a clear judgement, even if the writing is correct (grammar "checkers" results really are all "suggested").
Come to think of it, maybe there's an uncomfortable parallel with compiler warnings?
[1] Warning, not an actual definition.
[2] I think perhaps the "one-liner" tag, as misleading as it has become, represents the nearest I ever come to a single contained thought, rather than a fifteen interrelated ones.
It would have to be visually represented as not requiring you to get rid of it, but merely to draw your attention to it, if that's possible. On the other hand, you could argue that's what spelling checkers ought to do anyway, although they are not normally treated like that. At least, "not in dictionary" is a clear judgement, even if the writing is correct (grammar "checkers" results really are all "suggested").
Come to think of it, maybe there's an uncomfortable parallel with compiler warnings?
[1] Warning, not an actual definition.
[2] I think perhaps the "one-liner" tag, as misleading as it has become, represents the nearest I ever come to a single contained thought, rather than a fifteen interrelated ones.