Hi,

Personal dictioanries are not part of lingucomponent project.  They are controlled and supported from 
the word processor project.

So I am moving your issue to that project.

Thanks,

Kevin

You can define as many dictionaries as you want and apply them the langugage of
your choice under "Tools - Options - Language settings - Writing Aids -
user-defined dictionaries - New - Language".
It wouldn't make sense to predefine a default dictionary for every language.

closed

> You can define as many dictionaries as you want and apply them the langugage of
> your choice under "Tools - Options - Language settings - Writing Aids -
> user-defined dictionaries - New - Language".

I know.

> It wouldn't make sense to predefine a default dictionary for every language.

I disagree _strongly_.  The result of the current system is that users get their
personal additions to the various official spell-checking dictionaries for the
different languages mixed up.  It complicates things for the users that they
have to do this manually for every language they use in OOo.  And it further
makes it practically impossible for the users to use their personal additions as
feedback to the editors of the spell-checking dictionaries.

And when the two important spell-checking programs (Aspell and Ispell) can
manage to handle one personal dictionary per language, why doesn't it make sense
for OOo/Myspell to do the same?

I'm not sure I completly understand what you mean.

Let's take an example:
I write a document in English, Spanish and Russian.
I have the  Spell-checkers activated. They find errors but sometimes, words
marked as wrong must not be corrected (Names, concept, marks, etc). So I add
those unkown words to the user-defined dictionary I have created: "English",
"Spanish", "Russian".

Where is the problem?

> I'm not sure I completly understand what you mean.
>
> Let's take an example:
> I write a document in English, Spanish and Russian.
> I have the Spell-checkers activated. They find errors but sometimes, words
> marked as wrong must not be corrected (Names, concept, marks, etc). So I add
> those unkown words to the user-defined dictionary I have created: "English",
> "Spanish", "Russian".
>
> Where is the problem?

In that _you_ have to define and manage the extension dictionaries. All the
OOo-users I know expect the program to manage separate extension dictionaries
for each language they write and spell-check in.  They don't expect to have to
do that extra work themselves.

I hope this clarifies the problem a bit more.

Then we should predefine a dictionary for *each* language. There are more than
hundred! Even if at the begining those files are 0 byte size this would lead to
performace and usability problems (Can you imagin the submenu "Add" in the
context menu with more than hundred entries?)

You only need to create the dictionaries you need one time. I think it's not a
too heavy task. I don't know *a lot* of users who work with more than 4
languages. So predefine all languages would be useless for most of the people
and I'm sure a lot of them would have to delete manually this long list of
languages they'll never use.

Last thing, small but significant: those dictionaries are called *user-defined*
dictionaries, not "predefined" dictionaries.

Not a good enhancement.

closed

I am sorry, but I am again and again shocked by the way OOo developers ignore
existing good and working solutions.

You don't have to _create_ hundreds of dictionaries in advance, for words added
by the user.  Is there _really_ anything that prevents OOo from handling user
additions to the dictionaries like Aspell and Ispell does it, and create them the
first time the user wants to add a word to the dictionary for that language?

And the users I am in contact with don't care about "user-defined dictionaries".
They just want _OOo_ to keep track of which languages the different words belong
to.

SBA: A user-defined dictionary has the main purpose to get rid of certain
"spellcheck-nagging" about the user's name, his address and other words
he/she/it will come across repeatedly while doing "daily business".

User-defined dictionaries do NOT have the purpose to "report missing words to
the upstram dictionary maintainers".

I truly believe that "the users you are in contact with" are strongly interested
in enhancing whatever existing dictionaries. But I have strong doubts that this
kind of "supportes" are any kind of majority among the users. Most users want
things as easy as can be. Given the lenght of a context menu or the fact that a
language-dependant dictionary will not help much in a bilingual text (your
address will get marked as wrong again...)  - Now this will be hard for the
average users to understand.

I talked to the developer of the linguistic component. Our conclusion is that
there are two steps needed before "contributing personal dictionary entries" can
be made:

(1) Change the current format of the user-defined dictionaries so that they can
easily be sent to "maintainers" and be added to the existing OOo dictionaries.
An external tool that does so would also be a solution.

(2) Whenever a user wants to add a word, automatically create a user-defined,
language-dependant dictionary

SBA->Brubernavn:  If you feel like starting a project to enhance the existing
dictionaries entries, go ahead. But start with the first hurdles first. To
penalize the average user with a yet-more-had-to use linguistic module is the
wrong way.

We do appreciate all meaningful enhancement proposals, but since mind-reading is
beyond our capacity, we have to block "hurdle-implementing".

So in this case it took alittle to get to the core. I therefore insist to file
new enhancement requests according to my proposals above. Keeping THIS issue
open doesn' make sense because it is already too much to read before the real
point comes clear.

Thank you for your comprehension.
Reassigend to me.

SBA: Set to "Wontfix" (see my last posting, other features must be implemented
first).
In addition to (2), please note that the average user who is NOT interested in
"contributing a self-created ictionary" shall keep having a linguistic component
that is as easy to use as can be. And as far as I can tell, this means a
language-indepentant user-defined dict as a default (in order to easily and only
ONCE add the own address and NEVER see it again being marked misspelled).

SBA: Closed.