Le Sunday 18 July 2004 15:08, Mark Ryan a écrit :
I know automatic spell checking is just a tool. But we still have
spelling errors being found now, years after they were first inserted
into articles.
I am not convince that spell checking tools will improve that.
A spelling error squashing party would be more efficient I think.
Humans are prone to errors. I know I can proofread an
essay of my own over ten times and not notice the most obvious
spelling errors.
That's why WP is a collaborative project.
An automatic spell checker would just draw our
attention to possibly overlooked errors.
May be it also depends on the language.
Every time I use a spell checking tool in French, I find it just useless,
partly because it reports many spelling mistakes where there are none, and
can't find others.
How many spelling errors
would you find on Britannica?
I don't read Britannica. ;o)
Yann
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux