Comment # 4 on bug 1052970 from Frank Sundermeyer

I am not happy with replacing aspell by hunspell as suggested in FATE #323578.

aspell has much better support for HTML, XML, and TeX. Both spell checkers
support these formats (by ignoring commands and tags), but aspell allows to
specify certain tags/commands for TeX, XML and HTML that get checked.
With this you can, for example, check alt-Tags in HTML.

Aspell also lets you create your own filters, or, for HTML/XML lets you
explicitly specify which tags to check and which ones to ignore. 
Hunspell, for example, offers no way to ignore preformatted text (such as
program listings or command output) in spell checks. aspell does.

As for DAPS, the usage of aspell is hardcoded (DAPS is a tool to process
DocBook XML). Dropping aspell would not only mean that I would have to change
DAPS' spell-checking code, it would also mean that DAPS will loose
functionality for reasons mentioned above.

I strongly suggest to keep aspell.