Mael Hilléreau wrote:
Le 15 août 07 à 10:02, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit :
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Mael Hilléreau wrote:
> > What about my old document that I created without this option?
> > Should I "remake" all notes?
How do you know that _all_ notes should not be checked? Maybe I
wan't a few of them to actually be checked. Or sometimes I want them
all to be checked. I suspect it's difficult to generalize.
Has anyone suggested just putting a few check boxes in the spell
checking dialog, e.g. like this:
[ ] Check all insets
[ ] Check notes
[ ] Check footnotes
[ ] ...
Then let these settings be stored in the document...
IMO, this type of information has nothing to do in the document, it
is a session or a preference thing.
But, except for that, I like your proposal a lot. I think it's easier
to implement than all the other proposal and it doesn't touch the core
(provided you don't store the info in the document of course). At the
end, spell-checking is a frontend thing, nothing to do with the
document contents.
Why do say this is easier to implement than other proposals? That's
exactly what's in my patch (bug 1509)
Ah? Sorry I haven't followed very well this thread. I just read
Christian's mail and it did made a lot of sense. I've seen some patches
that modified the Insets themselves and I don't like that. I guess that
was another proposal.
(despite there's also a layout
keyword...)
Which is fine IMHO. As long as you don't touch the document contents, I
am happy :-)
A special inset would be a good complement to deal with
instance level (which in the patch is achieved with branches).
A special inset for disabling spellchecking looks wrong to me. Even i
you think that some part of the document needs no spellcheck, a
co-writer might think otherwise.
OK, sorry for interrupting this discussion, I'll let you guys design the
proper solution ;-)
Abdel.
