Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 5003
Spell check mistakes final period
Last modified: 2012-01-29 21:40:58 UTC
At least in spanish, the curly red underline used for spell checking mistakes final words in a sentence, checking the word plus the period. That is, instead of checking a final "word". it checks a "word." including the period, and underlines it. Upon left clicking on it to get suggestions, the same word is suggested (it is correct), if you select it for substitution, it is left untouched. Seems the "replacer" considers the final period, but the "checker" does not. Thanks.
Hi, This is my issue (lingucomponent). Under OOo 1.0.0 this was fixed and it should not be rporting this anymore. You are not by any chance using the ("replacement") dll that comes with Spanish Spellchecker are you? It should NOT be used for OOo 641d and later (including OOo 1.0.0!). If youa re using it please don't. Your spellcheck problems with a period at the end should go away. Hope this helps, Kevin
Uhmm... I did have the "replacement". Placed back the original and that problem is solved but a new one popped: In spanish both question and exclamation marks have an opening symbol, not just a closing one like in english. That is, you have "¡Eureka!" instead of "Eureka!" (Or "¿huh?" instead of "huh?"). Well, the same problem I described for the final periods happens for opening question and exclamation marks. Regards, GV
Hi, The punctuation issue is really a breakiterator.cxx issue and not something that should be handled in the spellchecker itself. I am changing this to started and adding Thomas Lange as CC to this one just so that he is aware of the double punctuation issue. Kevin
TL: This problem and allmost all other problems with the i18n (breakiterator, etc.) should be fixed in the next build based on an 642 source because of the use of the enhanced i18n.
TL: according to the above mentioned I set this one to fixed.
Hi Thomas, Since OOo 1.0.1 will be based on 641 source, I have added a workaround in myspell for OOO_STABLE_1 so this should not be a problem for the next release and will remove the workaround for 642 based builds. Thanks! Kevin
closed