Re: [w3c/editing] spellchecking - how to give JS devs more control (#166)

> I disagree on that. In combination with a cancelable beforeinput event, this could make for something useful. For example, in a collaborative editor, one may want to disable spell checking for ranges of text that a collaborator already has checked and accepted. Or one may want to mark a range as dirty because it has not been checked before.

👍 I haven't thought about such scenarios but that makes a lot of sense. So yes, 👍  for such a method.

> The size of that package is around 160MB for a set of mot major languages. Maybe in 10 years time that is something we can just embed in a webpage, but for now it still needs to be done server side.

Totally agree. Today (and I think that won't change) this should be done on the server side. But that itself doesn't change the picture of what happens on the client. It just happens slower.

> But the integration of that has to take place through a specialized connector in the JS editor that is aware of what is what -- for example, in the implementation I needed to make sure it ignores citations as well as text that has been tracked as deleted.

I agree that in more specialised use cases the spell checker must be tightly integrated with the text editor itself. But:

* In simpler scenarios (and that's a really big percentage) the entire text can be spell checked because that text contains no additional meta data that needs to be skipped. The popularity of Grammarly (which I use right now) shows that this is something worth considering.
* In more advanced cases we may not be able to do much without tight integrations. However, with `contentEditable=false/true` and `spellcheck=false/true` you can guide those external, generic spell checkers where they should be on and where off. It actually works this way now with both – the native spell checkers and Grammarly – they don't check the text in `cE=false` containers and they re-enable themselves for nested `cE=true` islands.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/editing/issues/166#issuecomment-426976852