Re: from a new user

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, David Epstein wrote:

> Kevin Atkinson wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, David Epstein wrote:
>>> Q1. Is it possible to have a file of incorrectly spelled words, that
>>> overrides the dictionary being used by aspell? For example, when using
>>> British English, I might want to outlaw "analyze". Alternatively, I might
>>> want to outlaw "analyse". How should I do this?
>>
>> Unfortunately, No.  But keep in mind there are two British English
>> variants
>> to chose from, use "aspell --dump dicts" to get a list of installed dict.
>>
>
> Kevin, thanks very much for your patient answers.
> Is aspell still under development? If so, how does one submit an enhancement
> request? I realize all the work is unpaid and voluntary, and yet ... it
> would be great to be able to have a private reject list of words that are
> rejected, no matter what the dictionaries say. This is particularly relevant
> when there are variant spellings, both correct, of some words, which is
> quite often the case in English. In some contexts, consistency is highly
> prized,  and it wouldn't matter which variant one used, provided it was
> always the same variant throughout a document.

The Aspell dictionaries should only contain one spelling variant for work
(with a few exceptions when the variants are so different that they are
unlikely to be confused with each other, for example: OK and okay).  You
should really look at the documentation that came with the English
dictionary.

> Another point is that the
> spelling of certain words is changing. It seems hard to make provision for
> these problems with the current structure of aspell. To make life simpler
> for the programmer, the implementation could be 100% literal, so that the
> programmer wouldn't have to worry about capitalization, plurals, verb
> endings and the like.

Your welcome to submit a feature request if one doesn't already exists 
(http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=245).