incubator-ooo-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gerrit Schünemann <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Spell checker underlining
Date Wed, 08 Aug 2012 08:42:14 GMT

> My thought is that underlining is sufficient.  An article in the
> Sunday NY Times (5 August) entitled "Auto Crrect Ths" examines
> reasons that this would be a bad idea. If the writer is unsure of
> the word or its spelling, he can always go to Artha and look it
> up.  (Artha offers various suggestions if the word is misspelled.)

If I may quote the article:

"One more thing to worry about: the better Autocorrect gets, the more we
will come to rely on it. It’s happening already. People who yesterday
unlearned arithmetic will soon forget how to spell. One by one we are
outsourcing our mental functions to the global prosthetic brain. "

That is just what I mean to say. A word is underlined because it's
misspelled. You right click on it and accept the suggestion. And you
learn next to nothing. If you just had a marker telling you, where the
mistake was made, that would be different.
While it is true that you can look it up using Artha (not to think about
usability), you can also look it up in the suggestions. But you still
have to check letter by letter at which point you did a mistake, which
is quite time consuming on long words.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message