Every Which Way But Loose

Office 12 Watch » New Squiggly in Word

Office 12 Watch » New Squiggly in Word — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:18:12 GMT

PingBack from http://www.office12watch.com/new-squiggly-in-word/

pschmid.net - Patrick Schmid: Putting You & I back into Office 2007’s UI - What else is new in Office 2007?

Sat, 11 Nov 2006 00:29:47 GMT

PingBack from http://pschmid.net/blog/2006/11/10/75

re: Every Which Way But Loose

C#r — Thu, 27 Jul 2006 21:08:10 GMT

Why does this feature require a different color? Isn't the use of loose vs. lose a grammatical error? It's vs. its is (often) flagged by the existing Word 11 (2003) grammar checker.

For the record I *like* the idea and appreciate that even if it misses a few and has some false positives (just like the existing grammar checker), anything you can do to contextual analyze and provide feedback is a good thing. I just don't think we need a different color... even if the internal engine that provides the feedback is different, why should the user be "bothered" by that? To the human it's all about wrong grammar.

(For the record, spelling is justifiably a different color because that communicates the nature of the problem in a meaningful way to the human.)

re: Every Which Way But Loose

rape videos — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 08:45:41 GMT

Your article is quite right, thanks.

re: Every Which Way But Loose

rape movies — Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:11:25 GMT

Asaspal. Memrano tu es besta. Amigo.

But For The Grace of God Go I

pf.org — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:40:27 GMT

Won of the moist exciting knew features in Microsoft Office 12 is contextual spell-check in Word. In other words, Microsoft’s engineers and programmers took the technology in they’re grammar czech and applied it too the problem of homonyms. Word will

re: Every Which Way But Loose

teen lesbian rape — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:25:27 GMT

Persone los pioneros non rabata. Great...

re: Every Which Way But Loose

Carrie — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:27:23 GMT

I'm in the turn-em-off camp. Occasional usefulness is far outweighed by the false positives. Sentence fragment? Why yes, it is. It's a section header, duh. Misspelled? Only because you didn't interpret the superscript letter as indicating a table footnote. Names? Abbreviations? Spelling errors, all of them. God help us. I am perpetually caught between Word's admonitions against passive voice and academic journals' admonitions against personal pronouns or other self-reference.

I spell- and grammarcheck before a document goes out. But mostly I rely on proofreading, by real people.

re: Every Which Way But Loose

Joe — Sun, 18 Jun 2006 13:35:10 GMT

In response to the people that keep saying contextual spell checking should be green: I don't think the mistake is 'word choice'. If someone spells lose 'loose', they meant the word lose. In their head, its still pronounced 'looz'. It seems clear to me its a spelling error that just happens to also be another word. So if anything, it should be red.

However, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be able to choose our colours. I second Troy Hepfner's suggestion here.

On a similar note, it annoys me that when i show tracked changes 'by reviewer', the colours for this are randomly different every time. Could there be a way to choose specific colours for specific reviewers so that they were constant?

re: Every Which Way But Loose

Brian G. — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 22:06:14 GMT

When the heck will Word "light-up" the OS, specifically Vista, so I can have a system wide spell checker. I'm not always in Word, so the only time benefit from the Word spell checker is when I'm in Word (duh!).

But, as I type this comment in the browser, it should be checking my spelling as well, just like Word, using my custom dictionaries and everything.

I won't even start on a rant about spell checking within Excel. Today I needed to check my spelling in Excel 2007 and it took me 5 minutes to find the spell check command in the ribbon. The ribbon needs a search feature, enabled by Alt <release> Ctrl-F or something.