Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On Montag, 21. Mai 2012, Olivier R. wrote:

Hello Olivier,

The differences look imho more technical than philosophical, even if
there are specific features in both of them.

thanks for your explanations of the LT/Lightproof differences.

Another solution might be to tag Hunspell dictionaries with
LT tags, but all Hunspell dictionaries were probably not conceived with
grammar checking in mind, and that’s probably more a dream than a
doable solution.

Yes, the difficulty comes from the flags used in hunspell. If a hunspell 
dictionary was just a long list of words without flags, one could easily add 
the tags from LT to each word.

If Lightproof could use LT lexicons, that could be a temporary solution,
but maybe memory-consuming, as you would have a dictionary for spell
checking and a lexicon for grammar checking.

I have never tried that but I think the finite state machine used internally 
by LT is quite memory-friendly.

If we could work together more closely that would be great. As you know, 
each rule in LT has an id so it can be identified. Maybe that id could be 
used to keep track of similar rules. Does LightProof also have integrated 
test sentences? Then LT could use them to see what rules are missing in LT 
and vice-versa.

Regards
 Daniel

-- 
http://www.danielnaber.de

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.