Oxford English is considered by some by the most "neutral" English.
It is basically British English except that words endings in -ize/izes/ized/ization are like US English.
Special case: colourized (GB: colourised US: colorized)
It is therefore natural to want to use this convention.
Codespell does not support it currently.
But the file codespell_lib/data/dictionary_en-GB_to_en-US.txt can be used to make two new ones:
dictionary_en-GB_to_en-OX.txt by keeping only -iz{e,es,ed,zing} words.
dictionary_en-US_to_en-OX.txt by skipping -iz{e,es,ed,zing} words and reversing the others from a->b to b->a.
dictionary_en_to_en-OX.txt can be done by merging the two previous ones.
(This requires a bit of special case management)
My question is twofold:
- Would you be interested if I PR this
dictionary_en_to_en-OX.txt file ?
- If not, how do we do with the licensing ? I intend to include it in Naev https://codeberg.org/naev/naev which is also under GPL.
Oxford English is considered by some by the most "neutral" English.
It is basically British English except that words endings in
-ize/izes/ized/izationare like US English.Special case:
colourized(GB:colourisedUS:colorized)It is therefore natural to want to use this convention.
Codespell does not support it currently.
But the file codespell_lib/data/dictionary_en-GB_to_en-US.txt can be used to make two new ones:
dictionary_en-GB_to_en-OX.txtby keeping only -iz{e,es,ed,zing} words.dictionary_en-US_to_en-OX.txtby skipping -iz{e,es,ed,zing} words and reversing the others froma->btob->a.dictionary_en_to_en-OX.txtcan be done by merging the two previous ones.(This requires a bit of special case management)
My question is twofold:
dictionary_en_to_en-OX.txtfile ?