[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Aspell-user] Special characters in a custom dictionary will break t
From: |
Kevin Atkinson |
Subject: |
Re: [Aspell-user] Special characters in a custom dictionary will break the spell check. |
Date: |
Fri, 6 Jul 2012 00:21:46 -0600 (MDT) |
User-agent: |
Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) |
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Stanislas Rolland wrote:
I am encountering this same problem: trying to add a word that contains a
special character into a personal dictionary gives an error like:
@(#) International Ispell Version 3.1.20 (but really Aspell 0.60.3)
Error: The word "erf?rt" is invalid. The character '?' (U+3F) may not appear
in the middle of a word.
The word is utf-8-encoded into a file that is piped to the Aspell command.
The command includes the --encoding='utf-8' option. The personal dictionary
file also specifies utf-8 as encoding, and if I add the word manually to this
dictionary, it is correctly taken into account when spell checking is done.
Apparently, Aspell ignores the option specifying the encoding of the input,
and assumes that it is encoded in the same character set as the main
dictionary.
I don't think that is the issue. The issue is that the Aspell is 8-bit
internally and the personal dictionary needs to get mapped to the same
character set that the main dictionary uses. The '?' means that the
Unicode character was not available in the main dictionary character set
and it thus defaulted to a '?'.
That being said, there is a way get to nearly any Latin letter accepted
with most dictionaries. It involved changing the dictionary charset to a
special "universal" one, for example iso-8859-1 will become iso-8859-1-u.
The dictionary data file will need to change and the charset files may
need to be installed (you can get them from the aspell-lang package).
I have posted about this before:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/aspell-user/2009-01/msg00005.html
There I describe reinstalling the dictionary from source. You should also
be able to hack the current installed version without having to recompile
anything as the *-u are backwards compatible with the vanilla versions.
-Kevin
Aspell Author