11 ms·

> typing a word five times adds it to the dictionary. That seems terrible. I only want to add words to a dictionary explicitly. Make a typo often enough now y

> typing a word five times adds it to the dictionary. That seems terrible. I only want to add words to a dictionary explicitly. Make a typo often enough now you got teh in your dictionary. I turn off autocorrect anyway.

derefr 13y ago
No; if you type a word that isn't in the dictionary five times, but let it get autocorrected each of those times, then it will keep autocorrecting it. It's cancelling/reverting the autocorrect suggestion that increments a word's "should be in the dictionary" score.
hnriot 13y ago
that's not how it works, just because you make a typo a few times wont mean it's picked by autocorrect. To bypass the five times, just type a word into safari's omni bar and it will add it to the dictionary. it would be an awful ux if words needed to be added explicitly to the dictionary.
- randallsquared 13y ago
  > it would be an awful ux if words needed to be added explicitly to the dictionary. What I'm learning today is that there is no such thing as best UX practices. Some people are clearly adamant that having to add words explicitly is awful. After all, the phone should be able to figure out what is wanted, right? Other people are just as certain that having the phone implicitly add words using any specific rule will fail often enough that it's obviously worse UX to try. I find myself in sympathy with both camps. I would like my devices and environment to just know what I want and do it without my having to explicitly direct actions. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be working out that way for a lot of areas. Instead, we have a mishmash situation where devices and apps try to do what most people want, and fail fairly often for a given user (unless I'm a major outlier). Ten years ago, when my computer failed to do what I expected, I understood that I'd failed to use it properly. I read documentation until I understood the failure or, at least, had some idea of what I might have done wrong, and tried again, and eventually I would understand the system. Now that the system is supposed to understand me, I've noticed two effects: First, detailed documentation of user interfaces is incredibly scarce. I wonder if there's a perception among other developers that if you need documentation, the UX has failed, and therefore the most direct route to apparently better UX is to have less documentation? Second, I find that partly due to the apparent complexity of my phone (or perhaps personification of it), I'm more likely to just swear at it and complain about it than to actually try to understand what I'm doing wrong.
- Larrikin 13y ago
  Id much rather click a button once than have to recorrect the computer five times to get my desired result.

derefr 13y ago

No; if you type a word that isn't in the dictionary five times, but let it get autocorrected each of those times, then it will keep autocorrecting it. It's cancelling/reverting the autocorrect suggestion that increments a word's "should be in the dictionary" score.

hnriot 13y ago

that's not how it works, just because you make a typo a few times wont mean it's picked by autocorrect. To bypass the five times, just type a word into safari's omni bar and it will add it to the dictionary. it would be an awful ux if words needed to be added explicitly to the dictionary.

randallsquared 13y ago
> it would be an awful ux if words needed to be added explicitly to the dictionary. What I'm learning today is that there is no such thing as best UX practices. Some people are clearly adamant that having to add words explicitly is awful. After all, the phone should be able to figure out what is wanted, right? Other people are just as certain that having the phone implicitly add words using any specific rule will fail often enough that it's obviously worse UX to try. I find myself in sympathy with both camps. I would like my devices and environment to just know what I want and do it without my having to explicitly direct actions. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be working out that way for a lot of areas. Instead, we have a mishmash situation where devices and apps try to do what most people want, and fail fairly often for a given user (unless I'm a major outlier). Ten years ago, when my computer failed to do what I expected, I understood that I'd failed to use it properly. I read documentation until I understood the failure or, at least, had some idea of what I might have done wrong, and tried again, and eventually I would understand the system. Now that the system is supposed to understand me, I've noticed two effects: First, detailed documentation of user interfaces is incredibly scarce. I wonder if there's a perception among other developers that if you need documentation, the UX has failed, and therefore the most direct route to apparently better UX is to have less documentation? Second, I find that partly due to the apparent complexity of my phone (or perhaps personification of it), I'm more likely to just swear at it and complain about it than to actually try to understand what I'm doing wrong.
Larrikin 13y ago
Id much rather click a button once than have to recorrect the computer five times to get my desired result.