Should spell checkers be mandatory ?

[demi]

we have firefox, my husband downloaded it because of the spellcheck but it doesnt work properly. dont know whats wrong but i allways go into the net from MS explorer.
it would be usefull to have spellcheckers on forums when your typing your post, same as there is options to make it bold, underlined ect. they should make all forums like that. there should be spellcheck on things facebook ect as well.

[Odsox]

it would be usefull to have spellcheckers on forums when your typing your post, same as there is options to make it bold, underlined ect. they should make all forums like that. there should be spellcheck on things facebook ect as well.

Not really any point if all web browsers have spell checkers, that way it works on whatever site you enter text into.
Otherwise you would have to set up the language in every site individually, which could be a mammoth task for some people who use multiple forums and multiple social networking sites.

[gregorach]

it would be usefull to have spellcheckers on forums when your typing your post, same as there is options to make it bold, underlined ect. they should make all forums like that. there should be spellcheck on things facebook ect as well.

Not really any point if all web browsers have spell checkers, that way it works on whatever site you enter text into.
Otherwise you would have to set up the language in every site individually, which could be a mammoth task for some people who use multiple forums and multiple social networking sites.

And it would be especially annoying for those of us whose vocabulary exceeds that of the standard spellchecker's dictionary... At least with the spellchecker embedded in the browser, I only have to teach it a word once.

Absolutely what Maykal said. You can see it in the Nooalf Q, which represents the "oo" sound in English (or even "ou" in French). There's no way of doing it in conventional English using only one letter. No definitive way, that is, although words like "who" appear to argue against that.

Mike

And how does it represent the Scots aspirated ch, the rolled r, or any of our strange variant vowels?

[Green Aura]

How would you write cuk buk, or would it be cQk bQk - it would for my MIL. Even in England the regional pronunciations would having each area writing as well as speaking a different language.

[Odsox]

Yes, you are both right, it's something I hadn't considered (but then I must confess I haven't considered too much about Nooalf)
If this were to be adopted it would be a very stupid retrograde step as instead of simplifying (?) written English, it would create an almost infinite quantity of sub-languages.
As it is we can all understand each other through the written word even though we might struggle to understand each other with speech.
Just imagine someone from the deep south of America trying to communicate with a Geordie, a written exchange would be relatively easy in standard English even with American spelling but a written conversation in Nooalf would be as incomprehensible as a spoken one.
Not that I'm saying Geordies are incomprehensible you understand.

[gregorach]

Not that I'm saying Geordies are incomprehensible you understand.

Had awa', hinney...

Ah kin spak Scots a'richt, but et's naw sae guid tae spel oot...

[MKG]

Precisely the objection I put forward to a proponent of Nooalf - who happened to be American. He claimed that Nooalf could deal with dialect, I claimed that maybe it could but then it would have to introduce variant spellings. And Dunc has a very good point - the Scots are excluded from the joys of this sytem. As are the French and the Dutch. I see it going the way of Esperanto (which forgot to include English as one of its root languages).

Mike

[niknik]

A Little Poem Regarding Computer Spell Checkers...

Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.

Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.




this poem ( and others with slight variations), all widely available on the www, rather shows that spell checkers are often useless.

I have run this in the past through numerous versions of spell checking software, and on only one occasion did it offer any corrections, and that was " marques" > marquees or marquess........ both still wrong!

I, like many others, hate bad spelling, but my posts will often contain many mistakes...(99 % are usually typos)and I will only correct them, where the meaning would be changed, or the word/ sentence difficult to read.

I haven´t got an English spell checker installed at present ( be it either US or Br English), and the time necessary to do checks for a forum post is (generally, IMHO, a waste)

[julie_lanteri]

haha, just had to check how to spell "variegated" for another post :)
I'll go to bed a little tiny bit smarter tonight... (the feeling probably won't last long, sigh)