Feature changed by: Scott Couston (zczc2311) Feature #305688, revision 7 Title: system wide spellchecker (hunspell) openSUSE-11.2: New Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Kálmán Kéménczy (kkemenczy) Description: Why Hunspell? MySpell is not developed for quite a long time either in Mozilla and in OpenOffice.org. Hunspell is a fork of MySpell, it has great improvements is several ways, and fully backward compatible with MySpell. Main features: * Extended support for language peculiarities; Unicode character encoding, compounding and complex morphology. * Improved suggestion using n-gram similarity, rule and dictionary based pronounciation data. * Morphological analysis, stemming and generation. * Hunspell is based on MySpell and works also with MySpell dictionaries. * GPL/LGPL/MPL tri-license http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunspell http://hunspell.sourceforge.net/ Fedora project: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureDictionary Ubuntu project: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ConsolidateSpellingLibs I also find a reference in the wishlist: http://en.opensuse.org/Wishlist_Various Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=354554 Discussion: #2: Petr Mladek (pmladek) (2009-02-06 19:21:04) In general, I think that it makes sense to have one system speelchecker (disk space savings, easier maintainability, shared user-specific- dictionary between applications, ...). I do not know the implementation details but I heard from more sides that hunspell was the best choice. It seems that Fedora and Ubuntu are going to use hunspell for this purpose => we could resuse their solution OpenOffice.org has already used the system hunspell since openSUSE- 11.1. It used the internal hunspell long time before. #3: Petr Gajdos (pgajdos) (2009-02-10 18:02:44) I don't have any objections. But there are plenty of packages that depends on aspell-devel, aspell or ispell. Question is if this is real dependency or not. For example gtkspell had fake dependency on aspell- devel, because it is linked againist enchant wrapper in fact. Many of them are real, though -- they must be reworked then. + #4: Scott Couston (zczc2311) (2009-02-10 21:36:17) + Apart from the purely technical aspect, Myspell offers very very poor + English US and slightly better English UK suggestion choice and is + hugely dependent on the user getting the first two letters correctly + spelt speelt spellt in the word that is mispellt. - English is such a + poorly constructed language when it comes down to conventions that + always apply. There is very little logic in the English Language so + without * Improved suggestion using n-gram similarity, rule and + dictionary based pronounciation data. * Morphological analysis, + stemming and generation MySpell is very poor. - The other notable drag + with the very very poor UK dictionary that still gets confused between + US/UK words - and there is a huge difference. Quite often I cut and + past into Open Office as the spell checker and word choice offerings + are just so much better - in every sense. I would love to see us use + the same spell checker and language modules that Open Office use so we + can stop relying on other dictionary modules being developed and make + use of the continual development that is done for us by OO. - Love the + 1 dictionary, love the continuity idea, but rather than reinvent + dictionary modules can we not use OO and its spell checker process. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/305688