Aaron Konstam: > Of a English word spelled incorrectly that the spellcheck does not > catch. It catches all of mine so I just wondered. But I don't want to > make a Major thread over this. You can send me the example(s) off list > if you don't want to clutter up the list. Of course I can't respond > directly to you. 'twas the other guy that started the topic... But if one is desperate to contact me, it can be done. However, I'll respond back to the list about some stuff, now, that's generally applicable to this topic. This pops up from time to time. I tend to make do with British spelling if I can't use Australian, it's generally close to ours, and certainly closer than American. That, or just do without spell checking. In all the years I've been using computers, it's somewhat unusual to have an Australian dictionary (or other checkers), so I've gotten use to not having one. Most of my spelling errors are typing errors, rather than spelling errors. I tend to notice them. For the cases that I did want one, my usual approach was to load up a document that's perfectly typed, and add all the words it complained about to the user dictionary. ;-) I've switched it on to check British English, now, and it's flagged "spelled" and "spellcheck" as incorrect. Ah, the irony... It should be "spelt," to us, and spell check or spell-check, until it become adopted as a new word. The usual culprits are things like color versus colour (British and Australian spelling), metre and litre (correct original spelling, by those who invented the terms), and words ending with ise/ize (most Australian words end with ise - like advertise, but I believe the Brits have gravitated towards using ize endings). So you can see, we really do need individual dictionaries, not picking one that's sort of similar. -- (Currently running FC4, in case that's important to the thread) Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists.