Re: Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

A gracious close to a stimulating discussion. One last question.

Why can't I have one pint for the new aquantenance and one for posting and
providing a simple start to to the best damned spelling enhancer the world
has every seen!

--
Greg Maxey/Word MVP
See:
http://gregmaxey.mvps.org/word_tips.htm
For some helpful tips using Word.

rndthought wrote:
> Tony,
>
> I apologize for that opening remark. It didn't come across as I
> intended. I'm sorry.
>
> That MS Word shouldn't do anything hasn't been any concern of mine.
> All of you have attention focused on explaining what I'd like it to
> do! And hopefully I've been respectful and friendly throughout with
> one exception to you Tony.
>
> First, MS Word already keeps track of every word you type and checks
> it against the dictionary. There would be no additional over head
> there.
>
> Second, to simply write a word to a file when either the auto correct
> is fired or when the user makes a selection in the drop down list
> from spell checker would not seemingly over tax the system.
> Certainly trivial compared to the UNDO feature that is undetectable
> in the background.
>
> Third, I do not know what you mean by effectively implement. All
> I've mused about is a simple misspelled word list that could be fed
> back into the text to voice feature that is already a feature in MS
> Word. I'll leave grammar enhancements to the grammar checker that
> is, again, already a feature in MS Word.
>
> The more MS Word can do the better. (And it would seem every release
> has aspired to do much more than each previous release) But again
> all those other things everyone has brought up (crosswords, poetry,
> insipid math puzzles in the Daily, word peace) haven't been a concern
> of mine. The points were brought up simply to demonstrate it already
> does so much more than "word processing." So saying that a feature
> that deals with spelling is ridiculous, I dare say, is ridiculous.
> MS Word is not a study aid.why not? Why not state MS Word isn't a
> HTML code writing tool, go use (whatever MS product is for that) or
> MS Word isn't a layout tool, go use MS Publisher if you want photos
> in a document. Why, because those features are there. So arguing
> that if a feature isn't already there then it should not be included
> just doesn't stand.
>
> Am I correct that you, Suzanne, Greg, and now Daiya (hello) are
> opposed because essentially: to produce a list of misspelled words
> would first, over tax the system and second, add too much additional
> cost to the product?
>
> If we assume, for friendly discussion, no performance or cost issues,
> that then it would be an agreeable feature? If so then we'll be at
> agreement and I can go to bed thankful of some new acquaintances!
> If not, I'm still going to bed and I'd still by each of you a pint!
>
> And no Tony, I don't believe the broadband parallel is much better.
> I don't do HTML or pictures in documents and still HAVE TO (just for
> you Greg :) ) take MS Word as it comes, and with no complaints! Eons
> better than Word Perfect 5 for which I spent 2x as much. Spelling
> is to word processing as.
>
> Thank you all.
>
>
> "Tony Jollans" wrote:
>
>> I'm not going to quibble over words. Yes, I *choose* to agree with
>> Suzanne
>>
>> I'm not sure that the argument that Word already does things it
>> probably shouldn't is grounds for suggesting that it do more. In
>> particular I would say that it should leave web page design to other
>> dedicated software (very few people actually like what Word does
>> with web pages and I've never seen it recommended as a tool for
>> this). What it can do with images is pretty limited. What it does
>> with embedded objects (not actually as much as you might think) is
>> almost a requirement for the creation of many documents.
>>
>> I don't think it's a difficult point to argue, and the reason, of
>> course, is that I enjoy a good argument :-) Word is not a study aid
>> and what you are suggesting would put quite a heavy load on everyday
>> activity; it would have to keep track of every word you typed and
>> whether or not you corrected it (or maybe just changed it later -
>> because not all misspellings result in invalid words) or it was
>> autocorrected or it was picked up by the spellchecker (or the
>> grammar checker) - and if so, what you did with it. In fact the more
>> I think about what it would have to do to effectively implement such
>> a facility, the more I am certain it shouldn't be done.
>>
>> OK - maybe the washer analogy was extreme, but the point stands.
>> Word does a certain type of manipulation of words and other document
>> content and there are other programs which do other types of
>> manipulation. The more that's bundled together, the more it would
>> cost to produce and to buy. Perhaps a better analogy would be this:
>> I have just got broadband Internet access and I looked at the
>> various packages that were available. I bought one for £15 a month.
>> I could have bought one for £30 a month (AOL, say) but I didn't want
>> most of the facilities (all, loosely, related to internet
>> connection) that were included in the AOL package; I didn't want
>> them running on my machine and I didn't want to pay for them. Your
>> suggestion (not unreasonable for a separately purchased addon) would
>> be attractive to a fairly small subset of current, or prospective,
>> Word users but all would have to pay for it.
>>
>> --
>> Enjoy,
>> Tony
>>
>>
>> "rndthought" <rndthought@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:291AF79F-EA00-4F73-A192-D365EA5AAAF0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Tony,
>>>
>>> First, don't debase yourself. You do not "half to", you choose to.
>>> Second, neither you nor Suzanne has established how "word
>>> processing" explicitly excludes building a personalized list of
>>> misspelled words for further study, personal development.
>>>
>>> You and Suzanne have chosen a difficult point to argue (and for no
>>> reason). If MS Word can manipulate HTML with web page previews,
>>> embed Excel tables able to be edited from within the document and
>>> manipulate image characteristics; the word processor has shattered
>>> the complexity barrier it would take to build a simple list file -
>>> if the option was selected - of misspelled words. The text to
>>> voice feature is already in place. The argument that my request
>>> would add too much complexity is simply absurd and baseless. My
>>> suggestion is not unreasonable and certainly not close to the
>>> horrible washer parallel. Trying to negate a "spelling is to word
>>> processing" relationship? You will half to try very hard.
>>>
>>> While MS Word is ubiquitous, not just CEOs and MPV use the program
>>> daily but it is on essentially every school computer in my
>>> district, it is not always possible to rely on the crutch of spell
>>> check and auto replace in the real word. This spelling tutor
>>> feature is one from which my children and I believe many children
>>> and adults would greatly benefit.
>>>
>>> The cause for so much resistance and the need to voice it still
>>> baffling. It is just a list of misspelled words. Why would this be
>>> so disconcerting?
>>>
>>> As always, except for the washer thing, thank you for the
>>> thoughtful comments.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Tony Jollans" wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd have to agree with Suzanne here. Word Processing is what Word
>>>> does. Just because it uses words does not mean that it does, or
>>>> should, provide every imaginable function that might also use
>>>> words; before you know it someone will be suggesting that it solve
>>>> crosswords.
>>>>
>>>> It is generally true that adding essentially unrelated
>>>> functionality is likely to bring problems. Imagine trying to add a
>>>> dish-washing facility to your washing machine; they both use water
>>>> and detergent to get things clean, so why not?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Enjoy,
>>>> Tony
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "rndthought" <rndthought@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>>>> message news:669AD00B-F1F5-474B-B9CA-D643A8CAFB1C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Suzanne, spelling is Fundamental to this purpose. Period.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, why so much resistance and the need to voice it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> A word processor is a way for people who know what they want to
>>>>>> say and how to say it to put those words on paper. Some of the
>>>>>> functions you mention (such as automatic creation of TOCs) are
>>>>>> fundamental to this purpose. Auto formatting certainly
>>>>>> facilitates it. Keep in mind that a huge target market for
>>>>>> Microsoft is "knowledge workers" (secretaries and the like) and
>>>>>> executives in large corporations. They need to be able to create
>>>>>> letters and reports and easily and quickly as possible. It is
>>>>>> assumed that they either know how to spell or will depend on
>>>>>> spell check to correct their spelling. I'll grant you that this
>>>>>> is an unreasonable assumption in the first instance and a
>>>>>> dangerous one in the second, but there you have it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Suzanne S. Barnhill
>>>>>> Microsoft MVP (Word)
>>>>>> Words into Type
>>>>>> Fairhope, Alabama USA
>>>>>> Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org
>>>>>> Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the
>>>>>> newsgroup so all may benefit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "rndthought" <rndthought@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>>>>>> message
>>>>>> news:61E72678-924E-421E-8801-E2C112916567@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>> Suzanne,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You make a good observation in regards to trying to be all
>>>>>>> things. As for keeping MS Word from loosing sight of the
>>>>>>> "primary functions" (or focus)... I believe even a cursory
>>>>>>> overview of the options and abilities in Word show's the ship
>>>>>>> has set sail (Invoicing with macros, auto creation of TOC, auto
>>>>>>> formatting, Auto fill forms, creating HTML documents, altering
>>>>>>> Image attributes - all on a word processor???). It seems to
>>>>>>> me that MS Word most definitely has higher aspirations than
>>>>>>> that of a functioned word processor or computerize type writer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If a spelling tutor, I like that term Suzanne, doesn't belong
>>>>>>> in a program whose primary purpose is to type words in the
>>>>>>> creation of documents, presumably for purpose of communicating
>>>>>>> information accurately...where then?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This isn't a fundamental change in the program or a complete
>>>>>>> change in the interface (which is coming in the next
>>>>>>> version)...simply an option (or if possible a macro as Greg has
>>>>>>> shown in a limited fashion) that could be enabled for those
>>>>>>> that wish to expand their spelling abilities.
>> Why
>>>> so
>>>>>> much
>>>>>>> resistance and need to voice it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you again for the thoughtful comments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where Word most often gets into trouble is through trying to
>>>>>>>> be all things to all people. I don't imagine, however, that
>>>>>>>> the Word
>> developers
>>>> will
>>>>>> ever
>>>>>>>> so far lose sight of the primary functions of Word as to
>>>>>>>> incorporate features that make it a spelling tutor.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Suzanne S. Barnhill
>>>>>>>> Microsoft MVP (Word)
>>>>>>>> Words into Type
>>>>>>>> Fairhope, Alabama USA
>>>>>>>> Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org
>>>>>>>> Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to
>>>>>>>> the newsgroup so all may benefit.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Word should catalog misspelled words to study.
    ... to the UNDO feature that is undetectable in the background. ... to produce a list of misspelled words would first, ... And no Tony, I don’t believe the broadband parallel is much better. ... > shouldn't is grounds for suggesting that it do more. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.docmanagement)
  • Re: Word should catalog misspelled words to study.
    ... Cost first. ... every additional feature adds complexity. ... Tony ... to produce a list of misspelled words would first, ...
    (microsoft.public.word.docmanagement)
  • Re: Word should catalog misspelled words to study.
    ... > Cost first. ... every additional feature adds complexity. ... > The main reason for this is not really what the MS publicity engine is ... >> Tony, ...
    (microsoft.public.word.docmanagement)
  • Re: Word should catalog misspelled words to study.
    ... Not one damn reason I can think of...but must warn you I'm about 5 ahead of ... Thank you Greg. ... >> one exception to you Tony. ... >> back into the text to voice feature that is already a feature in MS ...
    (microsoft.public.word.docmanagement)
  • Re: Cannot run Equation Editor
    ... At the risk of suggesting something else that you already checked, start Windows Explorer and search for an OFFICEAV.DLL file on the hard drive (be sure to include system and hidden files/folders in the search options). ... An error occurred and this feature is no longer functioning properly. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.application.errors)