Remarks in-line > -----Original Message----- > From: Howard Morris (aka Col Boogie) > [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 13:12 > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: 'Zhuravliov Alexey Gennadyevich' <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][API][WINDOWS]Whether Common Spelling API can be > implemented > > I am not sure why this is being discussed. [orcmid]
The request was that the spell-checking functionality of Apache OpenOffice be made available in some manner via CSAPI on Windows, so other Windows applications could make use of the different language lexicons that are distributed as (third-party) Apache OpenOffice extensions. > See https://hunspell.github.io/ [orcmid] Apache OpenOffice can include Hunspell (under the MPL 1.1 option) in binary form only. If it is installed as part of the official Apache OpenOffice distributions, it does not appear to be in a form where it is available for use by other programs. The lexicons are separate. > I recently came across something that Firefox and Open office were set > to share their spell checker. > That would be nice. [orcmid] We use third-party lexicons. We are not part of arrangements by which other parties use (forms of) them too. To the best of my knowledge, there is no joint activity between the projects, although AOO code could be adapted, if useful, without our having to know about it. > > Howard > _______________________________________________________________________ > I have examined some of the materials available for the CSAPI. > [ ... ] > It seems to me that the closely-held nature of the CSAPI and requirement > for license agreements is completely out of scope for Apache OpenOffice > and not compatible with policies of the Apache Software Foundation. > This is simply a road we cannot go down. > > I suggest that we not go any farther investigating this proposal unless > those encumbrances disappear. > > - Dennis > > PS: A third party could engage with Microsoft and supply a CSAPI- > accepting implementation. That might employ the same tools that AOO > employs for processing supplied lexicons. The third party would have to > navigate the licenses on such lexicons as well and ensure that this does > not introduce any licensing condition that is unacceptable to Microsoft. > The independent third party also might not be so opposed to empowering > the use of CSAPI-delivered spelling checkers by Microsoft products as I > imagine the contributors of lexicons to AOO might be. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alexey Zhuravliov [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 02:46 > > To: Rory O'Farrell <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][API][WINDOWS]Whether Common Spelling API can > be > > implemented > > > > Hello Rory, > > > > Wednesday, May 25, 2016, 9:27:48 PM, you wrote: > > > > >> DEH>> Please provide more information about the Common Spelling API > > > > ROF> Unless this does something dramatically different and improved > > ROF> from the existing spelling system, the English dictionary of > > ROF> which is very well serviced by Marcus, I suggest that, on the "If > > ROF> it's not broke don't fix it" principle we should leave the > spelling > > system alone. > > > > This could be new and useful feature when other programs could use > > AOO's spell checking engine. If MS's API can't be implemented maybe > > AOO developers can create a new interface. > > > > >> >>> Can Common Spelling API (which was in MS Office up to version > > 2000 as > > >> >>> far as I know) be implemented in AOO on Windows. > > -- > > Best regards, > > Alexey Zhuravliov > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
