Spellcheck needs updating

February 25, 2005 8:29 AM

How about adding some frequently used non-words to the spellcheck, for example, "blog".
posted by Capn to Feature Requests at 8:29 AM (21 comments total)

2.18.2005
SpellBound is a great free spellchecker for firefox and mozilla browsers. A bit tedious to install, once it's working you'll want to use it instead of the built in MeFi spellchecker.
posted by crunchland at 8:33 AM on February 25, 2005

(Crunchland's suggestion is from Matt's sideblog in the blue, and it's a good one).
posted by Plutor at 8:35 AM on February 25, 2005

I think we should add redundant and cumulative to the spellchecker, too.
posted by dios at 8:53 AM on February 25, 2005

I second Spellbound. It's faster than using the MeFi spell check and enables a personal dictionary. Install went okay for me.
posted by scarabic at 9:06 AM on February 25, 2005

I know I flock to things described as "tedious to install".
posted by smackfu at 9:07 AM on February 25, 2005

it wasn't that bad. You just have to download and install three different parts, bypassing the install protection built into mozilla each time. It's not that big a deal. less than 5 minutes, easily.
posted by crunchland at 9:10 AM on February 25, 2005

So all suggestions about improving/changing the spellchecker are automatically mooted?
posted by Capn at 9:35 AM on February 25, 2005

As Matt has said in the past, the MeFi spellchecker is a 3rd party solution and is terribly tedious/difficult to update. Or something like that.

So yeah: automooted.
posted by catachresoid at 9:48 AM on February 25, 2005

Capn, for now, yes. The third party spell checker can't add new words. So, the quick fix is Spellbound as Matt notes here.
posted by Arch Stanton at 9:48 AM on February 25, 2005

Fair enough.

moot moot moot!
(try it, it's fun).
posted by Capn at 9:54 AM on February 25, 2005

It's (Spellbound¹) not tedious now under firefox. A breeze.

1 Which also was the name of a good documentary.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:17 AM on February 25, 2005

If the site's Spell Check feature isn't going to be updated, then it shouldn't be a feature of the site. Dismissing a request to fix a broken site feature by telling people to use a plugin for a browser they may prefer not to use or may not be able to use isn't very helpful.

Also, there should be an FAQ section of MetaFilter that's part of the site (not an external site that isn't available in the MetaFilter interface), and this should be one of the FAQs.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:35 AM on February 25, 2005

OK, you can get to the FAQs indirectly through the Wiki link on the main MetaTalk page, but the FAQs are only available in a Wayback Machine archive, so they probably aren't being updated. We still need an integrated FAQ section.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:40 AM on February 25, 2005

If I may slide in a quick question here without opening another thread - has there been any consideration to adding the auto-more inside feature to Metafilter proper? It works well in AskMe and I would have found it useful in my last couple of Mefi posts.
posted by loquax at 12:16 PM on February 25, 2005

If the site's Spell Check feature isn't going to be updated, then it shouldn't be a feature of the site.

Because 0% of a feature is better then 90%?
posted by catachresoid at 1:20 PM on February 25, 2005

If the site's Spell Check feature isn't going to be updated, then it shouldn't be a feature of the site. Dismissing a request to fix a broken site feature by telling people to use a plugin for a browser they may prefer not to use or may not be able to use isn't very helpful.

Deleting a useful-if-not-perfect spellchecker used by the people who prefer not to use or may not be able to use a certain browser isn't very helpful either.
posted by Bugbread at 3:38 PM on February 25, 2005

telling people to use a plugin for a browser they may prefer not to use or may not be able to use isn't very helpful.

WAH! WAH! WAH!

First of all, no one's TELLING anyone to do anything. This "add words to the spell checker" thread has lived a 1000 lives here already and it isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Second: giving someone a client-side solution is actually the only helpful thing that we can do right now. If you prefer not to use Firefox, that's your problem, but it's an entirely valid option available for all platforms. Why not dig up an option for whatever browser you prefer and post it here rather than pissing and moaning about other people providing options?

Third: so your solution is to pull the feature, huh? Great work. Really 1st rate. Someone put this person in charge immediately.
posted by scarabic at 3:50 PM on February 25, 2005

The advantage of a spelling checker that works in your browser is that it works at every site, which is why you should be going "What? A spelling checker that works in my browser? That sounds so obviously and monumentally useful, I'M GOING TO INSTALL IT RIGHT AWAY, EVEN IF IT TAKES FIVE WHOLE MINUTES!"

I mean, surely MetaFilter is not the only Web site you ever type things into?
posted by kindall at 7:47 PM on February 25, 2005

It's not a word. It's a term, and one that I hope dies sooner than later.
posted by Eideteker at 8:51 PM on February 25, 2005

I'm not pointing any fingers, but some of you people need to take a rage dump.
posted by Capn at 11:35 PM on February 25, 2005

If the site's Spell Check feature isn't going to be updated, then it shouldn't be a feature of the site.

Decent, customisable web based spell checkers cost money and licenses need to be bought. Maybe you might want to suggest that a better spell checker be found and if you can get enough people together who are happy to pay for this feature maybe Matt will be prepared to fix it. I suspect he has bigger fish to fry, but you never know.

I think using a spell checker built into the browser is the correct solution. It's faster, I can add any words I wish and also I can run it in UK English. The web based spell check is useful for people who aren't at their own computers, in which case it's slightly better than nothing.
posted by dodgygeezer at 3:41 AM on February 26, 2005