# Re: Please focus on one generic spell checker in Debian (Was: Bug#487732: O: ispell -- International Ispell (an interactive spelling corrector))

• To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
• Subject: Re: Please focus on one generic spell checker in Debian (Was: Bug#487732: O: ispell -- International Ispell (an interactive spelling corrector))
• From: Thibaut Paumard <paumard@users.sourceforge.net>
• Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:10:31 +0200
• Message-id: <[🔎] F4E30014-6AC3-4F78-B295-E74DAAF4E7DC@users.sourceforge.net>
• References: <4860037F.1030407@bzed.de> <2flzlp9bb9r.fsf@klodrik.uio.no> <20080625195324.GA4495@agmartin.aq.upm.es> <200806291749.52216.debian@hendrik-sattler.de> <20080630180930.GA642@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de>


Le 30 juin 08 à 20:09, Bernhard R. Link a écrit :


* Hendrik Sattler <debian@hendrik-sattler.de> [080629 18:15]:

Am Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2008 21:53:24 schrieb Agustin Martin:

Each spellchecker has currently some special features. Fortunately, the only thing where ispell is stronger than the other spellcheckers (support for pseudocharsets like 'a, "a, \'a, ... ) is already included in aspell development version, so at that time we can drop ispell without any loss
of features. Not sure about hunspell here.



What tools are using such pseudo characters, probably because they do not
support 8bit character sets? Can't they be fixed to do so?
AFAIK, even latex knows the existence of the 8th bit, nowadays.



Just because some tool support 8bit characters, that does not mean that
using 8 bit characters is good. Especially for latex

1) Choosing encoding issues:
Just when almost anyone used latin1 or some bastardisation of that
everyone thought it might be safe now to use that, then utf-8 came.



And it remains pretty safe to use latin1 (or 9, or 15, or whatever you need) in about any situation (except in the subject field of e- mail). A latex file written 10 years ago using the latin1 encoding will compile just fine now, because you specified the encoding in the header. Depending on your installation, you may have to tell emacs explicitely which encoding to use for reading. Or you may have set it already using the "encoding" local variable.


Yet UTF-8 allows to spell properly the words with the "œ" character, which did not exist is latinx. So at last we can write proper love letters and "laisser nos cœurs éclore comme autant de fleurs aux printemps", which is what the French language is made for ;-)


2) Compatibility:

3) Stability

4) Easy of use:




Unlike the German language, there is no official way to write French with only 7-bit ASCII characters. It is a pain to read chopped-down French. Most tools deal well with latin1 and UTF-8. Those that don't are not for me, just like I don't you an English dictionary to spell- check my French writings.


Come on, UTF-8 is good. Non-UTF-aware software usually represents your text in an almost readable fashion (not much worse than "il est all'e au caf'e 'a pieds car son v'elo avait crev'e"). It's by UTF-8 design.

\end{UselessDigression}

BEst regards, Thibaut.