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,
Matt
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"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


Sponsored Ads