996571_en

Automatic corrections in the guidebook

@AntoineM

Subject : https://www.camptocamp.org/articles/diff/996571/en/prev/2294835


For research's sake, it's better to keep the alphabetical order in the right column (the column to the right) because it's easier to look up the proper spelling - since we know it - and to find the various misspellings in one place, than the opposite. The French version of this article even specifies this fact:

L'ordre alphabétique est tenu dans la partie droite. Par exemple, la correction aps >> pas sera classée sous P.

(see : https://www.camptocamp.org/articles/996571/fr/corrections-semi-automatiques-dans-le-topoguide#corrections)

1 Like

@AntoineM
@Modo_Topo_FR

L'idée n'est pas de tenir la liste exhaustive des fautes d’orthographe, mais de lister celles rencontrées couramment sur camptocamp

https://www.camptocamp.org/articles/996571/fr/corrections-semi-automatiques-dans-le-topoguide#quelles-corrections-rajouter

Which one would you remove ?

@Modo_Topo_FR

Why don't you just figure it out for yourself.

You may want to use this tool.

At first look, nothing seems bad to me on the list. It would be easier if you mentions items you would remove.

Just to mention it, google search can be a good help to find actual mistake, but not those who have been corrected

1 Like

abd >> and
adn >> and
abillity >> ability
abscence >> absence
absense >> absence
abundent >> abundant
abundunt >> abundant

Les deux premiers (and) sont mal classés. Je n'ai pas vérifié le reste.

1 Like

Subject :

are'nt >> are not

I guess the following was meant :

aren't >> are not

(although the first option is also a valid correction LOL)


Something else : "aren't" is just colloquial (not slang), it's not a mistake to correct - on a mountain addict site -


And then there's also "aren't you" which gives "are not you" instead of "are you not"... But let's forget this one because the question form "aren't you" is probly rare.


Subject

it's >> it is

This is a valid correction IF "it is" was meant - which is very often NOT the case - so many speakers (even native speakers) making the mistakes

it's

instead of

its

or

its'

Actually, I miss this section. Do you meant that items like :

don't >> do not

should not be in this list, as "don't" is not a misstake ? I yes, I agree with you.

Aw, who really cares...

I guess some people think that by copy-pasting Wikipedia, it should be good enough...

It's like using Google translate for climbing jive... it doesn't really work

Wikipedia has the rule to avoid contractions:

Avoid contractions, which have little place in formal writing. For example, write cannot instead of can't.

It makes sense to me to follow the same rule on C2C, but we can remove the corrections on contractions if we are worried about questions (which do not occure that much in topos).

and if you copy-paste, at least do it properly !

https://www.camptocamp.org/articles/diff/996571/en/prev/2295810

You are welcome, feel free to translate the french text into english.

Just who do you think you are ? You're the one that starts the mess... so please fix it up yourself (or not).

Il faut copier/coller les rattrapages qui sont a la fin de la section, c'est le B-A-ba du copieur/colleur.

@119935 , there is no good reason to speak like that, please assume good faith.

@antoine, what 119935 meant is, I suppose, that the "rattrapages" section must be at the very end of the article, as corrections are applied in the order they are in the article. Otherwise, a correction may be overwritten by another rule.

I've just put it at the end, can you check I did not make a misstake ?

Quite impossible.

Faith is belief, and belief is not rational.