Hi, > "If you want just a spell-checker package, then that is fine. You just > can't produce something that requires Category X (whether build or run > time)."
And Squiggly doesn't require anything that is Category X. The dictionaries come in many licences, it just seems most are LGPL. This is no different to how we teat fonts, people can use what ever font they want (include GPL ones) in their flex applications, however we can't bundled a LGPL or non Adobe compatible license font in a release. > I don't think this is the case, so I think he's saying we can't release it > unless we could find or create an english dictionary that isn't category X. We already have, see the SCOWL link in the same the legal discussion. [1] Justin 1.http://wordlist.aspell.net/dicts/
