Hadron Quark wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> __/ [ kevin bailey ] on Thursday 12 October 2006 14:29 \__
>>
>>> Hi People,
>>>
>>> I've put together an online word checker purely from OS tools.
>>>
>>> http://www.wordcheck.net
>>>
>>> It has only taken a couple of days and does not involve a single license
>>> cost.
>>>
>>> Just goes to show that by combining OS technologies that are available
>>> it is possible to build some neat applications.
>>>
>>> BTW - It also works well from PDA's and mobile phones due to it being
>>> designed for a small screen size.
>>
>> Much faster and cleaner than http://www.dict.org/ .
Thanks - I think dict.org is much more comprehensive and is a great piece of
work. If I'd seen it I may not have bothered!
But, mainly I was looking towards a building quick word checker so that it's
easy to check the spelling of consciense, aprehensive etc.
I also preferred just to use wordnet for the database so it's easy for users
to see and check other words which mean the same thing.
>
> But of course no where near as powerful or useful. In addition dict.org
> doesn't have adverts.
>
Sorry about the adverts but the 50c monthly revenue helps towards the
hosting costs!
Maybe dict.org should have a few ads and then some revenue could then be
channelled back towards wordnet, etc etc and the hosting providers etc.
Thinking about it, maybe I should put in bigger links back to the underlying
projects.
Just some ideas!
Kev
>>
>> As another example, WordPress (GPL-licensed FOSS) is getting an inline
>> spellchecker, which also relies on such lenient/permissive licenses. Same
>> with the WYSIWYG component, which uses TinyMCE, which I suspect is a
>> derivative of HTMLArea (sponsored by companies that sought to use it
>> in-house). High-quality, well-tested, and Free.
>
>
> dict.org is free. What are you talking about?
>
>
|
|
