Gerfried Fuchs said: > * Andrew Shugg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-20 11:38]: > > Andrew Lau said: > >> makes the package in question unuseable or mostly so, or causes > >> > >> should read: > >> makes the package in question UNUSABLE or mostly so, or causes > > > > No, unusable and unuseable are both valid spellings. > > > > http://dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict1&Query=unusable&Strategy=*&Database=* > > http://dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict1&Query=unuseable&Strategy=*&Database=* > > But the seconds version shouldn't be used, Andrew (Lau ;) is right. It > is the first time that I see it documented anywhere, I am not sure if > WordNet is correct in that respect...
Okay. Maybe a bug should be filed against the dict-wn package. ;) > I don't really care if it might be valid, unusable should be prefered > and is less confusing. It's not in the Pocket Oxford so I'll retract my backing for "unuseable". Andrew. -- Andrew Shugg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.neep.com.au/ "Just remember, Mr Fawlty, there's always someone worse off than yourself." "Is there? Well I'd like to meet him. I could do with a good laugh."
