Matthew wrote:

I agree that determining the ends of sentences is non-trivial.
However, I think that this is a good reason to do it once in OOo instead of 
each grammar checker having to figure it out manually.

a)  Let the grammar checker determine the end of sentence.   There are
a couple of Unicode glyphs that are used to indicate the end of
sentence in some writing systems, but when used in others, have a
different meaning.  [Whilst they should have different unicode
characters, that is not always the case. ]

b) In academic writing, it is common to include all punctuation, when
the quote is in a foreign language.  With East Asian languages, this
is more or less a necissity.  Breaking the sentence because of a
couple of quates that use periods for things other than the  end of
the sentence, is going to result in fragmented grammar correctiion.

I vote for the unified UI. If necessary, have an Options button to open a 
dialog box generated by the current grammar checker, but I think the day-to-day 
operations of grammar checking should look the same regardless of the back-end 
tools.

+1

It might be a good idea to have two levels of comments -- one brief and one 
detailed.

+1

It would be nice if the user could set the colour of the line associated with 
each tool independently,

Interesting idea.

They simply don't trust what it says.

+1

ong, but it is not explained _why_ they are wrong.

+4

Two potential issues.
a) The explanation might not be clear to the end user.
EG: "Noun class mismatch".
[That would affect non-native speakers, more thn native speakers.]

b) The grammar checker runs into a situation which was not anticipated
by the rule set creator.  EG:  Correct punctuation of "John where
james had had had had had had had had had had had the teachers
approval."  Deleting "had" in all instnaces except the lst would
drastically change the meaning of the sentences.

On the downside, including the explanations is going to significantly
increse the amount of time it takes to create the rule sets.
Esperanto can get by with around 50 rule sets.  Adding an explanation,
when one is violates is neither time consuming, nor difficult.
English, OTOH, requires several thousand rule sets.  Adding the
explanation is going to be time consuming, and non-trivial, due to the
numerous exceptions to the rules.)

Use full stops to determine sentence breaks, even though some of these will be 
wrong.

If you want to limit the grammar checker to languages that use the
Latin writing system, that will work.  If you want it to use languages
that use other writing systems, that won't work. [There is a similr
issue in writing Yiddish, and Ladino, using OOo.]

Check whole document against a single grammar checker in a single language.

Have a setting so tht the user can tell OOo which grammr checkers to
use with which languages.   Then, when "check whole document" is
requested, the approprite parts are handed off to the "correct"
grammar checker.   [I can easilly see somebody wanting the English to
be checked using Graviax, and Language Tool, for German, with Au
Gramadoir for Afrikaans, even though all three have rule sets for both
German, and English.]

xan

jonathon
--
Ethical conduct is a vice.
Corrupt conduct is a virtue.

Motto of Nacarima.

Reply via email to