Naive spellcheck in Open Office Writer



  • I was using OO Writer (standard install of V3.01) on Windows XP and typed in the word "naive". Writer recognised what I was typing, helpfully added the diaeresis mark over the "i" to give me "naïve" and then marked the word as misspelled!


    I tried the same thing with standard installs of OO and NeoOffice on OSX and at least they know how to spell the words they change.


    And in an added WTF - the forum software doesn't seem to process HTML symbols in the "subject" (at least in the preview), but it does in the "message"



  • Re: Naïve spellcheck in Open Office Writer

    HTML character entities are evil, don't use them.



  • Bonus WTF: One of the suggestions is the word that just got modified and marked wrong.



  • @008 said:

    Bonus WTF: One of the suggestions is the word that just got modified and marked wrong.


    Damn .. I didn't even check for that one. I was so dumfounded with Writer being helpful.



  • Spell checking the auto-corrected naïve works fine in Linux as well. I wonder if there is some system character encoding or dictionary getting in the way on Windows. I imagine OO's auto-correction is built-in, but it might be using a Windows system dictionary for spell checking that is missing that word.

    In that case TRWTF is that Windows' dictionary doesn't contain properly accented words.



  • TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.



  • @Spectre said:

    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.

    Correct .. there is no letter ï in the English language. Thats because ï is a combination of the letter i and a diaeresis mark. Which is a perfectly valid glyph in the English language.

    So I suppose I should say "Epic fail" or some such at this point.



  • @OzPeter said:

    @Spectre said:
    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.

    Correct .. there is no letter ï in the English language. Thats because ï is a combination of the letter i and a diaeresis mark. Which is a perfectly valid glyph in the English language.

    So I suppose I should say "Epic fail" or some such at this point.

    Meh. I think there's no diaeresis in English, either. 8=]



  • @Spectre said:

    @OzPeter said:
    @Spectre said:
    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.

    Correct .. there is no letter ï in the English language. Thats because ï is a combination of the letter i and a diaeresis mark. Which is a perfectly valid glyph in the English language.

    So I suppose I should say "Epic fail" or some such at this point.

    Meh. I think there's no diaeresis in English, either. 8=]

     

    You think wrong.



  •  @Spectre said:

    @OzPeter said:
    @Spectre said:
    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.

    Correct .. there is no letter ï in the English language. Thats because ï is a combination of the letter i and a diaeresis mark. Which is a perfectly valid glyph in the English language.

    So I suppose I should say "Epic fail" or some such at this point.

    Meh. I think there's no diaeresis in English, either. 8=]

     

    Now that, I think, is quite naïve of you...



  • @tster said:

    @Spectre said:
    @OzPeter said:
    @Spectre said:
    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.
    Correct .. there is no letter ï in the English language. Thats because ï is a combination of the letter i and a diaeresis mark. Which is a perfectly valid glyph in the English language.

    So I suppose I should say "Epic fail" or some such at this point.

    Meh. I think there's no diaeresis in English, either. 8=]
    You think wrong.
    It depends on what English you're talking about. Canadian standard English defined by the Canadian Press used in publications does not recognize the diaeresis in the word naive. I personally think there ought to be a diaeresis in there, but when proofreading formal things I remove it. I can't speak for British or American English, but in Canada naive is spelled thus in formal writing.



  • @Welbog said:

    It depends on what English you're talking about. Canadian standard English defined by the Canadian Press used in publications does not recognize the diaeresis in the word naive. I personally think there ought to be a diaeresis in there, but when proofreading formal things I remove it. I can't speak for British or American English, but in Canada naive is spelled thus in formal writing.

     

     

    Canadian English? What's that all aboot?



  • From Oxford's Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English Second Edition (printed in 1970):



  • @Welbog said:

    @tster said:

    @Spectre said:
    @OzPeter said:
    @Spectre said:
    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.
    Correct .. there is no letter ï in the English language. Thats because ï is a combination of the letter i and a diaeresis mark. Which is a perfectly valid glyph in the English language.

    So I suppose I should say "Epic fail" or some such at this point.

    Meh. I think there's no diaeresis in English, either. 8=]
    You think wrong.
    It depends on what English you're talking about. Canadian standard English defined by the Canadian Press used in publications does not recognize the diaeresis in the word naive. I personally think there ought to be a diaeresis in there, but when proofreading formal things I remove it. I can't speak for British or American English, but in Canada naive is spelled thus in formal writing.

     

    There is only one "English" and it's spoken by English people



  • @ender said:

    From Oxford's Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English Second Edition (printed in 1970):
    Needs more wooden table.



  • @Evo said:

     @Spectre said:

    @OzPeter said:
    @Spectre said:
    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.

    Correct .. there is no letter ï in the English language. Thats because ï is a combination of the letter i and a diaeresis mark. Which is a perfectly valid glyph in the English language.

    So I suppose I should say "Epic fail" or some such at this point.

    Meh. I think there's no diaeresis in English, either. 8=]

     

    Now that, I think, is quite naïve of you...

     

     

    Why do you guys feel the need to dot your i's twice? That might be an early sign of OCD/



  • @DeLos said:

    Why do you guys feel the need to dot your i's twice? That might be an early sign of OCD/
     

    Whät ärë ÿöü tälkïng äböüt? Ï lïkë thë döts!

     TRWTF is that characters not present or frequently used in english can cause such headaches in computer environment. I understand space was scarce in the early 1960's, but couldn't they have at least made a 7-bit ascii and immidiatly specified an 8-bit extended-ascii or something?



  • @Spectre said:

    TRWTF is spelling naive as naïve. This is English; there is no ï letter in English.
     

    Right.  And no need for extra dots over any letter; unless, of course, one is naming a Heavy Metal band.

     



  • @dtech said:

    Whät ärë ÿöü tälkïng äböüt? Ï lïkë thë döts!

    In Windows 7 beta, the devs decided to play smartasses, and wrote all device class names in the registry (HKLM\CurrentControlSet\Class\{...} default values) in even more wretched spelling:

     [Ti9BV][Ũňіνęґ§άļ Ѕéřïäℓ βϋѕ ςόńŧяǿľļєřš !!! !!! !]

     



  •  A møøse once b.. ahh nevermind, you know where this is going.



  • Let's ban AOL - oh, they're being bought out (was Re: Naive spellcheck in Open Office Writer)

    @alegr said:

    [Ti9BV][Ũňіνęґ§άļ Ѕéřïäℓ βϋѕ ςόńŧяǿľļєřš !!! !!! !]

    My shameful days as a uk.aol chatroom monitor was sparked by that. (GuideUK .. for those who used AOL and needed reminding)

    The impulse to terminate your account for such blatant 'hacker' behaviour was, however was mitigated by the fact that

    a) I no longer work for them,

    thank $GOD

    b) find such behaviour as... normal on the interwebs.

    c) I have bugger all to do with the moderation on here.

    thank $GOD.

    d) at the time I (personally) found such behaviour amusing - contrary to the 'god complex' some of the others had.

    Oh, the crap I had to deal with.... (e.g. message from peer - (at past 9pm (GMT),) in a teens room where they're swearing) Room X says you allow <swearing> Me: Yes.... Them: Why? It's not allowed!!!one!!eleven! Me: Um yes it is, at that time of night, fuck off.)

    More fun was to be had at the times we met face to face...

    0



  • @PJH said:

    @alegr said:

    [Ti9BV][Ũňіνęґ§άļ Ѕéřïäℓ βϋѕ ςόńŧяǿľļєřš !!! !!! !]

    My shameful days as a uk.aol chatroom monitor was sparked by that. (GuideUK .. for those who used AOL and needed reminding)

    By reputation, those who use AOL generally do need reminding... to breathe in, breathe out, put one foot ahead of the other, then the first again, and watch out for that lamppost!

    @PJH said:

    the 'god complex' some of the others had.

    Heh, being a mod on AOL is like being God...  to a petri-dish full of single-celled slime moulds.

    I would like to apologise to single-celled slime moulds for the above remark




  • I am new to OO, please help my naiveity. My OO writer spellcheck shows plural and tense as misspelled. i.e. centres is not recognised and centre s is offered. likewise provisions is not recognised and provision s is offered. daa.. what now...help



  • @Eric P said:

    I am new to OO, please help my naiveity. My OO writer spellcheck shows plural and tense as misspelled. i.e. centres is not recognised and centre s is offered. likewise provisions is not recognised and provision s is offered. daa.. what now...help


    Change it to use Canadian English instead of American English, or add the word?


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.