Tony,
I apologize for that opening remark. It didnt come across as I intended.
Im sorry.
That MS Word shouldnt do anything hasnt been any concern of mine. All of
you have attention focused on explaining what Id like it to do! And
hopefully Ive been respectful and friendly throughout with one exception to
you Tony.
First, MS Word already keeps track of every word you type and checks it
against the dictionary. There would be no additional over head there.
Second, to simply write a word to a file when either the auto correct is
fired or when the user makes a selection in the drop down list from spell
checker would not seemingly over tax the system. Certainly trivial compared
to the UNDO feature that is undetectable in the background.
Third, I do not know what you mean by effectively implement. All Ive mused
about is a simple misspelled word list that could be fed back into the text
to voice feature that is already a feature in MS Word. Ill leave grammar
enhancements to the grammar checker that is, again, already a feature in MS
Word.
The more MS Word can do the better. (And it would seem every release has
aspired to do much more than each previous release) But again all those
other things everyone has brought up (crosswords, poetry, insipid math
puzzles in the Daily, word peace) havent been a concern of mine. The points
were brought up simply to demonstrate it already does so much more than €śword
processing.€ť So saying that a feature that deals with spelling is
ridiculous, I dare say, is ridiculous. MS Word is not a study aid€¦why not?
Why not state MS Word isnt a HTML code writing tool, go use (whatever MS
product is for that) or MS Word isnt a layout tool, go use MS Publisher if
you want photos in a document. Why, because those features are there. So
arguing that if a feature isnt already there then it should not be included
just doesnt stand.
Am I correct that you, Suzanne, Greg, and now Daiya (hello) are opposed
because essentially: to produce a list of misspelled words would first, over
tax the system and second, add too much additional cost to the product?
If we assume, for friendly discussion, no performance or cost issues, that
then it would be an agreeable feature? If so then well be at agreement and
I can go to bed thankful of some new acquaintances! If not, Im still going
to bed and Id still by each of you a pint!
And no Tony, I dont believe the broadband parallel is much better. I
dont do HTML or pictures in documents and still HAVE TO (just for you Greg
) take MS Word as it comes, and with no complaints! Eons better than Word
Perfect 5 for which I spent 2x as much. Spelling is to word processing as€¦
Thank you all.
"Tony Jollans" wrote:
I'm not going to quibble over words. Yes, I *choose* to agree with Suzanne
I'm not sure that the argument that Word already does things it probably
shouldn't is grounds for suggesting that it do more. In particular I would
say that it should leave web page design to other dedicated software (very
few people actually like what Word does with web pages and I've never seen
it recommended as a tool for this). What it can do with images is pretty
limited. What it does with embedded objects (not actually as much as you
might think) is almost a requirement for the creation of many documents.
I don't think it's a difficult point to argue, and the reason, of course, is
that I enjoy a good argument :-) Word is not a study aid and what you are
suggesting would put quite a heavy load on everyday activity; it would have
to keep track of every word you typed and whether or not you corrected it
(or maybe just changed it later - because not all misspellings result in
invalid words) or it was autocorrected or it was picked up by the
spellchecker (or the grammar checker) - and if so, what you did with it. In
fact the more I think about what it would have to do to effectively
implement such a facility, the more I am certain it shouldn't be done.
OK - maybe the washer analogy was extreme, but the point stands. Word does
a certain type of manipulation of words and other document content and there
are other programs which do other types of manipulation. The more that's
bundled together, the more it would cost to produce and to buy. Perhaps a
better analogy would be this: I have just got broadband Internet access and
I looked at the various packages that were available. I bought one for ÂŁ15 a
month. I could have bought one for ÂŁ30 a month (AOL, say) but I didn't want
most of the facilities (all, loosely, related to internet connection) that
were included in the AOL package; I didn't want them running on my machine
and I didn't want to pay for them. Your suggestion (not unreasonable for a
separately purchased addon) would be attractive to a fairly small subset of
current, or prospective, Word users but all would have to pay for it.
--
Enjoy,
Tony
"rndthought" wrote in message
...
Tony,
First, don't debase yourself. You do not "half to", you choose to.
Second,
neither you nor Suzanne has established how "word processing" explicitly
excludes building a personalized list of misspelled words for further
study,
personal development.
You and Suzanne have chosen a difficult point to argue (and for no
reason).
If MS Word can manipulate HTML with web page previews, embed Excel tables
able to be edited from within the document and manipulate image
characteristics; the word processor has shattered the complexity barrier
it
would take to build a simple list file - if the option was selected - of
misspelled words. The text to voice feature is already in place. The
argument that my request would add too much complexity is simply absurd
and
baseless. My suggestion is not unreasonable and certainly not close to
the
horrible washer parallel. Trying to negate a "spelling is to word
processing" relationship? You will half to try very hard.
While MS Word is ubiquitous, not just CEOs and MPV use the program daily
but
it is on essentially every school computer in my district, it is not
always
possible to rely on the crutch of spell check and auto replace in the real
word. This spelling tutor feature is one from which my children and I
believe many children and adults would greatly benefit.
The cause for so much resistance and the need to voice it still baffling.
It
is just a list of misspelled words. Why would this be so disconcerting?
As always, except for the washer thing, thank you for the thoughtful
comments.
"Tony Jollans" wrote:
I'd have to agree with Suzanne here. Word Processing is what Word does.
Just
because it uses words does not mean that it does, or should, provide
every
imaginable function that might also use words; before you know it
someone
will be suggesting that it solve crosswords.
It is generally true that adding essentially unrelated functionality is
likely to bring problems. Imagine trying to add a dish-washing facility
to
your washing machine; they both use water and detergent to get things
clean,
so why not?
--
Enjoy,
Tony
"rndthought" wrote in message
...
Suzanne, spelling is Fundamental to this purpose. Period.
Again, why so much resistance and the need to voice it?
"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
A word processor is a way for people who know what they want to say
and
how
to say it to put those words on paper. Some of the functions you
mention
(such as automatic creation of TOCs) are fundamental to this
purpose.
Auto
formatting certainly facilitates it. Keep in mind that a huge target
market
for Microsoft is "knowledge workers" (secretaries and the like) and
executives in large corporations. They need to be able to create
letters
and
reports and easily and quickly as possible. It is assumed that they
either
know how to spell or will depend on spell check to correct their
spelling.
I'll grant you that this is an unreasonable assumption in the first
instance
and a dangerous one in the second, but there you have it.
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the
newsgroup so
all may benefit.
"rndthought" wrote in message
...
Suzanne,
You make a good observation in regards to trying to be all things.
As
for
keeping MS Word from loosing sight of the "primary functions" (or
focus)... I
believe even a cursory overview of the options and abilities in
Word
show's
the ship has set sail (Invoicing with macros, auto creation of
TOC,
auto
formatting, Auto fill forms, creating HTML documents, altering
Image
attributes - all on a word processor???). It seems to me that MS
Word
most
definitely has higher aspirations than that of a functioned word
processor
or
computerize type writer.
If a spelling tutor, I like that term Suzanne, doesn't belong in a
program
whose primary purpose is to type words in the creation of
documents,
presumably for purpose of communicating information
accurately...where
then?
This isn't a fundamental change in the program or a complete
change in
the
interface (which is coming in the next version)...simply an option
(or
if
possible a macro as Greg has shown in a limited fashion) that
could be
enabled for those that wish to expand their spelling abilities.
Why
so
much
resistance and need to voice it?
Thank you again for the thoughtful comments.
"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
Where Word most often gets into trouble is through trying to be
all
things
to all people. I don't imagine, however, that the Word
developers
will
ever
so far lose sight of the primary functions of Word as to
incorporate
features that make it a spelling tutor.
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the
newsgroup so
all may benefit.