

Spell check your entire website in one go - zemaj
http://spellr.us

======
zemaj
Been a while since I've been to news.yc, but I've been reading the RSS feeds
more recently, so thought I should pimp my new job at some stage :)

Feedback welcome!

~~~
lkozma
Crawling should respect the excluded pages in robots.txt and rel="nofollow"
directives.

~~~
zemaj
That's a tough one. This has been much debated, but at the end of the day we
decided to go with our own filtering system since robots.txt and
rel="nofollow" are created with search engines in mind, not spell checking. In
general you want search engines to cover a subset of what you want spell
checked.

You can filter on any CSS3 selector & a[rel="nofollow"] would block no-follow
links if you don't want them included. By default we filter out any block with
a class or an id that contains "comment" which does a pretty good job of
filtering a lot of user comments.

~~~
dangoldin
You could always just have an option for it.

I feel people would trust your tool more if they are able to tell it what to
ignore.

~~~
zemaj
That was the intention of choosing CSS selectors over robots.txt or nofollow,
although a checkbox to specify following robots.txt & nofollow would be useful
as you say.

------
parenthesis
It's a little bit silly that it says "The first 100 pages have been reviewed
…" when the site I submitted only has a handful of pages.

------
yafujifide
This is wonderful. I scanned my website and found two spelling errors. I did
not know "seeked" was not a word. It is supposed to be "sought".

------
gjm11
The five things it found on my website (only five because, as zemaj explains,
that's all they list if you use the quick scanner on their front page instead
of creating an account) were all false positives. (Two non-English words, both
in the middle of lengthy tracts of non-English; it seems to me that there
might be useful heuristics for spotting this situation. One phonetic
explanation of how to pronounce something; not much they could do about that.
One colloquial neologism; not much they could do about that. One perfectly
correct but uncommon word.)

I bet there are genuine typos, at least, on some of my pages. I find one every
now and then. So whatever heuristics "spellFOCUS" is using to distinguish
errors from non-errors seem like maybe they could be improved.

Nice interface.

The pay-for-service prices seem awfully high to me, but I'm not the target
market for several different reasons.

------
Jem
Should "Your site has queued." be "Your site has been queued."?

~~~
ConradHex
I think "queue" could arguably be used as a verb.

~~~
crescendo
Both of the OP's examples are verb uses of "queue". I believe the question
here is whether to use active or passive voice.

IMO the passive construction ("has been queued") sounds more natural, because
you wouldn't normally think of an inanimate object like a website queuing
itself in a line. But it could go either way, as "queue" technically can act
as either a transitive or an intransitive verb.

------
xelfer
Immensely useful. Well done.

~~~
skmurphy
I use it every week and find it extremely powerful. The custom dictionary and
the ability to highlight exactly what is wrong are two key differentiating
features. A grammar checker add on would also be very useful.

------
graemep
It would be nice to have the ranking of error by likelihood on my desktop, but
only being able to spell check my site (where everything has already been
through a desktop spell checker).

It might be useful for user generated content (I assume that is what they mean
by "multiple content contributors cannot be easily identified by the website
content manager"), but then, should you be editing everything your users get
wrong?

On my site the free scan found 0 likely errors, I possible error that is an
accepted shortened form in the context, four unlikely errors. These were my
surname, the name of the site, a correct (if not often used) plural form and a
common abbreviation.

~~~
raffi
Shameless plug but I'm working on the user generated content side at
<http://www.afterthedeadline.com>

------
froo
Unleashing it on YouTube now, I have no high hopes.

~~~
froo
Ok well after letting it go on several websites known for butchering the
English language, it seems that the results have been capped at 5 for the free
version.

This is either a bug, or an undocumented feature.

~~~
zemaj
You're right, that totally wasn't clear from the text we had on there. Thanks
for pointing that out. I've updated the copy so it makes more sense now. The
quick scan on the homepage only lists the first 5 errors. You need to create
an account to see the full list of errors.

~~~
froo
Anytime.

I've got a couple suggestions for further things you could do with the tool.
Should I just send that via the email on the contact page?

~~~
zemaj
That be great, thanks!

------
entelarust
awesome, found a couple on my site

i have always looked for a service like this

------
chrisa
Great implementation, I especially like how it visually shows me the error on
my page. It would be nice if I could add the words it thinks are errors to my
custom dictionary, so I don't have to type each one in.

------
yef
Very nicely done. I would add 404 and other error checking as a premium
feature if you haven't already done so.

------
JabavuAdams
I hate the name, but it found a spelling error on my site. Cool! "Langrangian"
!= "Lagrangian"

