Re: Grammar Checkers

Subject: Re: Grammar Checkers
From: Matt Ion <soundy -at- NEXTLEVEL -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 17:01:36 -0800

On Thu, 27 Jun 1996 13:37:22 -0500, Michael Wing wrote:

>I know our egos bruise at the thought of a machine doing some of our
>work, but I would rather work with spelling and grammar checkers than
>without them. To me, the applicability of checkers depends on whether
>you expect it to do 1001f the work or less than 100 If you expect
>the checker to 100, you're going to be disappointed.

As I said, I personally use a spellchecker *sometimes* (like when it
actually MATTERS) to double-check the connection between my brain and
my fingers, since I know my typing skills are far from perfect.
Grammar checkers are something I've never found to be particularly
useful though, at least not for me.

Your friend and mine,
"Maybe all I need, besides my pills and surgery,
is a new metaphor for... reality." -- Queensryche

Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of Next Level
Productions, or anyone else of sound mind from this planet or dimension!

TECHWR-L List Information
To send a message about technical communication to 2500+ list readers,
E-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send administrative commands
ALL other questions or problems concerning the list
should go to the listowner, Eric Ray, at ejray -at- ionet -dot- net -dot-

Previous by Author: Re: Grammar Checkers
Next by Author: Re: OpenDoc
Previous by Thread: Re[4]: Grammar Checkers
Next by Thread: Re: Grammar Checkers -Reply

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads