On Saturday, June 29, 2002, at 11:07 , George Georgalis wrote:
> Huh? Why not look it up in a dictionary? ... oh I guess you said that to
> :)
part of the problem is that there are many
dictionary routines that would consider
algorithm
to be a legitimate word - irregardless of
the correct annotation in the OED. { in
particular this autoSpellingWingDingDing MUA
does not like 'irregardless' - but accepts
'algorithm' blindly. }
there are also problems with such systems,
eg:
complement v. compliment
stationary v. stationery
but that takes us into the level of semantics...
{ one of the reasons that I leave most of this class of problem
to the TerranInfestationUnits and their NerfHerding Fellow travellors,
since there is 'the english that we speak' and that which we write'... }
> ispell on unix, http://www.wordsmyth.net/ and http://www.dict.org/ have
> an API for programs but I've not used it...
>
> // George
My complements on these two references.
The ungainly question of portability now rears its head -
should one assume that they have a network connection or
that they have a *nix box????
Also - if one is going to go this way - one will need to
allow for "the user's home grown" dictionary - a real
annoyance - since one of the first computerized wordChecker
always FREAKED at Eritrean and Eritrea - so it was rather
annoying to try and use that code to write about the shift of
the Eritrean Liberation Army from being a Red Horde to a
Freedom Fighting Organization when Addis Addiba fell to
the Marxist Overlords....
{ we'll skip over the wade-giles v. pin-yin translation wars....}
capicia???
ciao
drieux
---
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
