was (RE: ispell findings...) now...making changes

[Bill S]

Hi Allen (et al);

The ispell spell check program has been used @speakeasy.org for at least a
year and seems to work well there. Perhaps we could make use of their
experience with this program. They are running a SUN Unix system similar
to ours except for the Freeport software and they are using Pine and PICO
in,  I think, the same versions we use on SCN.  

If someone from hardware wants to contact them I'd suggest Mike
Apgar(mike at speakeasy.org), Doug Brick (dbrick at speakeasy.org) or their help
desk (support at speakeasy.org).

Don't know if there are any political implications here but I think they'd
be at least willing to share any problems that may have been associated
with .ispell.english. They seem to be using it with no obvious problems
and after all the worst they can say is "NO". 

Bill Scott

On Sun, 26 Jul 1998, allen wrote:

> I agree with Chanh.  we do not have state secrets to protect...nor the
> luxury of a big budget for testing...or lots of expert bodies for doing
> the testing.  In the meantime...our users are the ones who are suffering...
> and I thought THEY were why we are here!
> 
> On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Chanh Ong wrote:
> 
> > Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:38:56 -0700
> > From: Chanh Ong <chanh at scn.org>
> > To: hardware at scn.org
> > Subject: RE: ispell findings...
> > 
> > I think Bob has done enough testing and I also done some testing my and 
> > I have not run across any more issue.  
> > 
> > If you have any specific reason, let hear it.  
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-hardware at scn.org [mailto:owner-hardware at scn.org]On Behalf Of
> > > John Johnson
> > > Sent: Friday, July 24, 1998 1:48 AM
> > > To: hardware at scn.org
> > > Subject: RE: ispell findings...
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 23 Jul 1998, Chanh Ong wrote:
> > > 
> > > > If I do not recieve any objection in a week, I will assume it 
> > > will be put in
> > > > for Freeport user to have a better speller.
> > > 
> > > WRONG APPROACH!  We need to _determine_ whether that is a suitable thing
> > > to do.  It needs to be TESTED.  (And I mean _tested_, not just played
> > > around with a little while.)  If we are not going to do this properly,
> > > then I object to putting it in.  
> > > 
> > > === JJ =================================================================
> > > 
Bill S
bk846 at scn.org         "Warning:Dates on the calendar  
billhs at speakeasy.org   are closer than they appear."
****Unless otherwise stated, this message may be forwarded*****

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
END