Filed under: Design, Text, Blogging, Google, web 2.0
Spell checking text fields just became sleeker with "Spellify"
Want to make it easier for visitors to your web page to fill out text boxes without fear of spelling mistakes? Spellify is a versatile spell checking solution that lets users spell check text boxes on your web sites . The users just type the words/sentence they want to be spell-checked and if there's an error, out pops a small dialogue box with proper spelling-suggestions. Password fields are automatically ignored. You can also specify Spellify to ignore special text fields if you want to. There is no need to press the "Go" or "Check" button or nothing.
The current version of Spellify is compatible with most of the front running browsers in the market including Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, and Safari.
[Via: Ajaxonomy ]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ScottMGS said 12:18PM on 12-31-2007
Close but no cigar. I entered "u r defenitely wrong too thimk" and it caught "defenitely" and "thimk" but missed "u" and "r" which, last time I checked are not properly spelled words. (I didn't expect it to catch the improper "too".)
Reply
Taltos said 12:40PM on 1-02-2008
Notice the emphasis on spelling and not grammar mistakes. U, r, and too are all valid words, hence why it didn't "catch" them. It works fine for what it's meant to do. Now if it claimed that it could prevent the horrid bastardization of the English language, then it would be lying.
ScottMGS said 10:18PM on 1-02-2008
Uh, "u" and "r" are not valid words in English. "I", "a" and, sometimes "O" are valid, single-letter English words but "u" and "r" - definitely not.
Reply
Taltos said 6:42AM on 1-03-2008
Hmmm...technically true. I've yet to find myself being corrected in a spell checker for typing either letter by itself though... I suppose it's the simple problem of spell checkers not being formatted to check for internet slang then, which defies normal logic. The lack of grammatical guidelines invokes the error as it cannot tell if the letters are simply being put there or if the letters are misspellings. However, it works fine otherwise and I wouldn't put it at fault for not catching either "r" or "u" considering how those that speak with "r" or "u" probably wouldn't bother correcting themselves in the first place. =P
ScottMGS said 9:43AM on 1-03-2008
Well, after all, spell checkers are supposed to be technical, eh? 'Sides, if I could get my website to aggravate those who type in 1337- and IM-speak that would just be a great bonus! ;-) (Oh, and smileys, too.)