[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Which spell checkers to include by default?



(I just subscribed to this list and tried to construct the References
field manually. I Hope it won't broke threads.)


Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:

[Luca Capello]
> > It seems that I cannot find a comparison of the differences spell
> > checkers.  Please, could you enlighten me on why hunspell should be
> > a better default one?
>
> I can only refer to the knowledge I have gotten from those I know that
> work on spell checkers.  The features of spell checkers is normally
> how well they handle word transformations, concatenations and
> proposals.

You made good points on what spell-checkers are _technically_ better.
I don't know them very well myself but I understand that many of them
are not suitable for synthetic and agglutinative languages like
Finno-Ugric languages. Hunspell seems to be, though, as it was
originally designed for Hungarian.

(For Finnish we even need a completely unique system Voikko which is
used through libvoikko1 and programs depending on it, see 'aptitude
search ~Dlibvoikko1'.)

But I think this is not the main point when deciding the _default_
spell-checker for Debian. A spell-checker may be technically superior to
others but if it's not supported by many languages (i.e. no dictionary
packages) it may not be good default and standard install. I have no
opinion about this myself. Finnish users use Voikko anyway and it is
installed through the Finnish environment task (or desktop task, I don't
remember). I think the question of default spell-checker is more
practical than technical; it has to be considered from supported
languages' point of view.


Reply to: