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 :)<p>Feedback welcome!
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.)<p>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.<p>Nice interface.<p>The pay-for-service prices seem awfully high to me, but I'm not the target market for several different reasons.
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).<p>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?<p>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.
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.