Re: Is SmartWords smart? : Dictionaries vs. spellcheckers

[Daniel Say say@xxxxxxxx]

" ----- Original Message -----
" From: Adriano Ortile 
" To: 
" Sent: Sunday, March 21, 1999 9:36 AM
" Subject: R: SmartWords Spellers ["Dictionaries"]
"
" > I think that this can considered true if, and only if, you need " "one"
" > English language dictionary. But what if you are not English orAmerican?
" > Even if TTG will offer foreign dictionaries (it will?), theproblem of
" > hyphenation still remains unresolved. And, not to be ignored, with
" > Microlitics dictionaries you are limited to use one, and always the same,
" > dictionary. Not so happy idea.
" > So I hope TTG worked to enable the use of multiples
" dictionaries, and
" > user-selectable (or definable) hyphenation rules.
"
" No doubt that's all true, and I do not, in fact,
" need any other dictionary. But I've used MS Word
" and WordDefect, as well as Signature, and the
" old MicroLytics dictionary in Xy/Dos is far superior
" in terms of speed, ease of use, flexibility and
" its ability to suggest the correct alternative in
" a surprising number of cases.
		Microlytics Dictionary? When was this?
		I have a Microlytics spellcheck list.
		The only Microlytics I know is the
		Random House Encyclopedia for DOS.

		If The ShartWords were smart, it would
		use a Dictionary and be able to tell
		us when words are used in wrong 'diction'.

		As it is, the real world has to modify
		'Murrican spell-checkers to create real English
		supplements to check how English is supposed
		to be spelled.A
		
		If SmartWords were smart, then we would have
		multiple language spellcheckers, more than the
		short "Latin and foreign language phrases" found
		in the appendices of some paper dictionaries.

		There are other languages than American English.
"
" I do have sympathy to those of you who
" need alternative dictionaries; I was referring
" only to my own admittedly selfish interest
" here.
"
" jim besser
"
"