[Javascript] Spell Checker

[John Warner]

Re Nice to have or need to have, I suspect the goal here is to automate the
testing process, so likely his 'answer' checker might require good
spelling. BUT that is 100% guess on my part.

John Warner




> -----Original Message-----
> From: javascript-bounces at LaTech.edu 
> [mailto:javascript-bounces at LaTech.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 2:05 PM
> To: [JavaScript List]
> Subject: Re: [Javascript] Spell Checker
> 
> 
> On 8/13/07, SosCpdGMail <soscpd at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm sure, that will be slow, and every time you upgrade the 
> > dictionary, people will need to download the entire cache 
> again(or you 
> > will split? Not useful at all). Why not http request to a 
> server-side 
> > script? One word each time will be very fast, and don't need to be 
> > sync, you can cache by the responses. MSWord don't spell 
> check sync, 
> > why you? Like that you can do the language check on the 
> fly. You can 
> > protect your js code to, I work like that today, creating a script 
> > element in the DOM on the fly and executing the string I 
> get back from 
> > php.
> 
> Sure the client-side behaviour of "Use Ajax to do spellcheck 
> via a WebService" is easy enough.  But how does one implement 
> the WebService?
> 
> If you build a solution that handles only a single word 
> because that's all the current design requires, how well will 
> it scale to a solution where the user is typing a whole 
> sentence?  .. or if the input is changed to a textarea 
> (implying potentially MUCH more text than a single word or sentence)
> 
> Del's use was for a quiz.  I wonder how many teachers accept 
> incorrectly spelled answers as "good enough" for full credit. 
>  Is this a nice-to-have or a need-to-have feature?  Are the 
> quiz answers likely to be found in a dictionary of standard 
> english, or are you going to have to add the answers (and 
> potential misspellings)  There are a lot of considerations.