Re: Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

I think the new UI will be much more helpful to new users and casual users
than to established users. I am told, however (and must accept, since I
haven't yet had a chance to play with it), that users tend to resist the new
UI at first but surprisingly quickly come to be comfortable with it and love
it. Usability studies have been very encouraging, I'm told. Time will tell.
Many corporate giants are still using Office 2000 because the UI change in
Office XP was too much for them; this dramatic paradigm shift will really
rock their world!

--
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.

"Tony Jollans" <My Forename at My Surname dot com> wrote in message
news:eJMqPf1%23FHA.3340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Yes I keep up to date on that blog. And I do accept, in part, the
rationale
> for the new UI but I see more benefit to MS from a redesign than I really
> do to customers en masse.
>
> As (I thought) I said and as you seem to to also be saying, the new UI
seems
> to be all there is - there isn't any news of real feature correction or
> improvement or addition.
>
> --
> Enjoy,
> Tony
>
>
> "Suzanne S. Barnhill" <sbarnhill@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:eb8L#S0#FHA.4092@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > If you want to understand the reasoning behind the "fancy new
interface,"
> I
> > suggest you read Jensen Harris's series of blogs about the history of
the
> > Word UI and the rationale for the new one. My reservations about the new
> UI
> > (aside from fears that it will be much more difficult for the ordinary
> > "power user" to customize) are that all of the developers' energy and
> > resources have gone into the UI, and very few of the features or bug
fixes
> > that have been requested for several versions running will make it into
> this
> > version.
> >
> > The base URL for Jensen's blog is http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/
> >
> > The History category of blog topics
> > (http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/category/10948.aspx) includes a
> > series on "Why the New UI" that I think you'll find instructive.
> >
> > --
> > 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.
> >
> > "Tony Jollans" <My Forename at My Surname dot com> wrote in message
> > news:%23raYxNz%23FHA.1600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Firstly, let me say I'd love to join you for a pint!
> > >
> > > I see no real harm in your proposal - and perhaps benefit for some.
What
> I
> > > question is not whether it should be available, just whether it should
> be
> > > available as standard in Word. I have, I suppose, two concerns: cost
and
> > > complexity.
> > >
> > > Cost first. I don't have a company budget; I buy my own software and I
> > watch
> > > the price climb every time a new version is released with a lot of
bells
> > and
> > > whistles I don't want. What I want from Word is a word processor (and
I
> > know
> > > we can argue about exactly what that means). What I don't want from
Word
> > is
> > > a web page designer or HTML editor, or a DTP program, or a graphics
> > editor.I
> > > already have all of those including, in particular, FrontPage
(although
> I
> > > don't use it) and Publisher which are already in Office. I also don't
> > > particularly want a spelling or grammar checker.
> > >
> > > Leaving cost aside, every additional feature adds complexity. The more
> > > complexity there is the more core functionality can be compromised. By
> and
> > > large, Word does a pretty good job of most things but there is plenty
> > scope
> > > for improvement. To veer off slightly, people seem to be getting
excited
> > > about the upcoming 'Word 12' but I haven't seen very much that
suggests
> it
> > > has significant improvements in word processing (numbering, for
example,
> > > seems to be the same old mess) - what it does have is a fancy new
> > interface.
> > > The main reason for this is not really what the MS publicity engine is
> > > telling us, it is to give Microsoft an excuse for rewriting and
properly
> > > integrating what has become a somewhat confused collection of
> > > loosely-related features; that's a little bit cynical, but only a
little
> > > bit.
> > >
> > > You make a fair point that Word already checks words in real time, but
> > that
> > > does give a performance hit and there would be quite a bit more to
fully
> > do
> > > as you propose. That said, however, Word has an ever-improving
interface
> > > provided for code developers to write AddIns to perform almost any
> > function
> > > imaginable and that is where I would see your idea fitting in. Working
> > with
> > > the spell checker in code is not the easiest or error-free of options
> but
> > it
> > > might be possible to go some way towards what you want. I will take a
> look
> > > at what Greg has done - strictly for my own enjoyment of course.
> > >
> > > Now, about that pint ....
> > >
> > > --
> > > Enjoy,
> > > Tony
> > >
> > >
> > > "rndthought" <rndthought@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > news:277ACF8A-6C76-494A-9C09-D524C03551D3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > 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: multiple inheritance
    ... slice" of functionality, and use MI to get at it from a class that has this ... to think much more about the design at this level than any most programmers ... I'm a MI AND Interface fan. ... Point 1: Aggregation ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: More questions for Sean Pitman.
    ... functional complexity, anyway? ... related to the bacterial flagellum. ... Bacteria with flagella aren't ... functionality relates to added complexity. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Great SWT Program
    ... orthogonal to whether or not a program has a decent user interface. ... A few also knew the arrow keys existed. ... "useful functionality required to qualify the application as an IDE". ... Or maybe you simply use "real text editor" as a synonym for IDE; ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: Trigger on a Qfile ... WHAT??
    ... break functionality which worked previously. ... Find the feature is broken. ... these people migrate rather than using the features that RD/TL ... completely ignoring what the rant is about - and completely ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: Ensuring a method exists
    ... When different classes offer similar functionality and you want ... Interface types are more flexible than class types because the former ... (defgeneric rem (collection object)) ... It's left up to the responsibility of the programmer to define the right methods, or to leave them out when they are actually not necessary. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
Quantcast