i18n@... wrote:

>
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >
> > ***
> > What would a spellchecker be for a language that doesn't have a
> > standardized orthography?
>
> That would be the spell checker that recommends options, not enforces
> them (like most spell checkers),or it could simply be the "null spell
> checker". Not every internationalization or localization effort needs
> every feature that everyone that came before had.

But what would it be checking against? Where would these recommended
options be coming from?

> > You do realize that no one who can actually write English (i.e. passed
> > Freshman Comp, even though it used to be something mastered in high
> > school) uses a "grammar checker"?
>
> Yeah I think that would be the first to get dropped from the above list
> - but it might be helpful for communication in English for Africans
> (e.g) - I often get the feeling the 419 spam I get was perfected by such
> grammar checkers :)

Um, are you suggesting that Vai-literate people write English in Vai
script?

> > (I don't know how well described the
> > Vai language is, but even if it has a grammar of the quality of
> > Whitney's Sanskrit, Dixon's Dyirbal, or Keren Rice's Slave, it probably
> > isn't the case that a codified/able tradition of Vai prescription exists
> > for the "grammar checker" to check.)
>
> Implementing a grammar checker would almost certainly greatly extend any
> schedule for implementing the rest of the above. It is a more difficult
> engineering task, in that, as you pointed out, the solutions are not
> necessarily known. In contrast, plugging strings into a UI designed to
> have strings plugged in is more of a process then an engineering effort
> these days.

***
Gack!! This posting was suddenly ended with screen after screen of
"sponsored links"!! What ith yahoo wroughting?
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...