A Microsoft Office (Excel, Word) forum. OfficeFrustration

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » OfficeFrustration forum » Microsoft Word » General Discussion
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  

Word should catalog misspelled words to study.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 6th, 2005, 05:38 AM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

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.




  #12  
Old December 6th, 2005, 10:51 AM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

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.





  #13  
Old December 6th, 2005, 05:50 PM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

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.






  #14  
Old December 6th, 2005, 06:32 PM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

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 15 a
month. I could have bought one for 30 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.








  #15  
Old December 6th, 2005, 08:26 PM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

Following up on this, the spelling function would be a perfect application
for a Word add-in, to be added in only by those interested in using it (and
willing to take the performance hit that would inevitably result).

--
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.

"Tony Jollans" My Forename at My Surname dot com wrote in message
...
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 15

a
month. I could have bought one for 30 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.









  #16  
Old December 6th, 2005, 09:35 PM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

If joining (or re-joining a healthy fray) is debasement, then I to am
heading to de basement ;-).
You and Tony both appear to enjoy a good argument. So what's good for
the goose is good for the gander.

Personnally I am a terrible speller (actually I know how to spell, but
I am a careless typer and poor proofreader). I noticed with amusement
that you emphasize your spelling of "half to." Ok, half is spelled
correctly, but the English teacher would still make a mark on your
paper.

How would the enhanceement to Word you propose handle that? ;-)

I would wager heavily that the powers at Microsoft have the wherewithal
create a spelling enhancer like you envison, but at the end of the day
I don't feel that they will do so for the reasons that Suzanne and Tony
have put forth. I will add that it certainly isn't something that I
would want to pay extra for.

The List Spelling Errors Addin that I have posted on my website was
more a result of my personal efforts to learn how to use Class Modules
in VBA than enhance my spelling. Yes it is limited. I thought about
the enhancements that you recommended and quickly realized that
achieving them was far beyond my capability.

  #17  
Old December 6th, 2005, 11:22 PM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

I am almost positive this group *has* seen requests that Word should solve
crosswords. Or perhaps I have it confused with the request that Word should
help write poetry by providing a rhyming dictionary.

Not to mention all the demands that Word should include a template for "how
to word a cover letter", a template for a letter of condolence to a friend,
a template for a letter of reprimand for an employee, etc, etc, etc.

Rndthought,

Suzanne's resistance to your idea comes from a context of seeing years of
ridiculous requests for Word. The ability to "export a list of misspelled
words in this document" could be quite useful, and I might vote for that,
but Greg's add-in has it covered.

But I am *solidly* against any implication that it is Word's responsibility
to teach people how to spell, and that's what you seemed to be asking.

I personally think that the more we depend on computer programs to *think*
for us on an everyday level, the closer we move to the apocalypse. So
resisting such a suggestion becomes a matter of principle.


On 12/6/05 1:51 AM, "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.


  #18  
Old December 7th, 2005, 01:37 AM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

Thank you Suzanne.

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:

Following up on this, the spelling function would be a perfect application
for a Word add-in, to be added in only by those interested in using it (and
willing to take the performance hit that would inevitably result).

--
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.

"Tony Jollans" My Forename at My Surname dot com wrote in message
...
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 £15

a
month. I could have bought one for £30 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.










  #19  
Old December 7th, 2005, 03:53 AM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

Tony,

I apologize for that opening remark. It didn’t come across as I intended.
I’m sorry.

That MS Word shouldn’t do anything hasn’t been any concern of mine. All of
you have attention focused on explaining what I’d like it to do! And
hopefully I’ve 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 I’ve 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. I’ll 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) haven’t been a concern of mine. The points
were brought up simply to demonstrate it already does so much more than “word
processing.” 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 isn’t a HTML code writing tool, go use (whatever MS
product is for that) or MS Word isn’t 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 isn’t already there then it should not be included
just doesn’t 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 we’ll be at agreement and
I can go to bed thankful of some new acquaintances! If not, I’m still going
to bed and I’d still by each of you a pint!

And no Tony, I don’t believe the broadband parallel is much better. I
don’t 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 £15 a
month. I could have bought one for £30 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.









  #20  
Old December 7th, 2005, 03:54 AM posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

Suzanne,

wink I'll buy you two pints!

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:

Following up on this, the spelling function would be a perfect application
for a Word add-in, to be added in only by those interested in using it (and
willing to take the performance hit that would inevitably result).

--
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.

"Tony Jollans" My Forename at My Surname dot com wrote in message
...
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 £15

a
month. I could have bought one for £30 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.










 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Word 97 in Windows XP to maintain formatting Charlie''s Word VBA questions General Discussion 21 October 24th, 2005 09:49 PM
Please add an outlining feature like WordPerfect's. zaffcomm General Discussion 1 September 20th, 2005 07:21 PM
Word2000 letterhead merge BAW Mailmerge 3 June 25th, 2005 01:17 PM
is word perfect compatible with office word? Noreen General Discussion 1 May 11th, 2005 11:17 PM
How do I create & merge specific data base & master documents? maggiev New Users 2 January 13th, 2005 12:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 OfficeFrustration.
The comments are property of their posters.