I'm unsure whether this is a bug or not: With German language being used I can enter "Firewall-Regeln", and it's accepted, even though "Firewall" is not a native German word (German adopted many IT words). However when I want to be very correct and mark "Firewall" and set the language to English, then the _whole_ phrase is marked as being not correct. That's not correct IMHO. Why would I do that? Assuming that one day the language tags will be exported to PDF so that screen readers can pronounce the words correctly without having a huge table of exceptions (When spelling "Firewall" according to German rules, it would sound quite different). Also hyphenation rules may be different for the languages involved.
It is true it is surprising that the spellchecker takes the hyphenated string as a whole, using the English dictionary for the whole thing, when in fact it there are two different languages used for the different elements. Reproduced with: Version: 7.4.2.3 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 382eef1f22670f7f4118c8c2dd222ec7ad009daf CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.15; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: de-DE (en_AU.UTF-8); UI: en-US Calc: threaded A similar report is Bug 131487. Could you please see if that covers your usecase and if your voice should rather be added there? Thank you!
To my mind => NAB. Perhaps László should comment on how the spell-checking is structured. And what if anything additional could be achieved for crafting the dictionaries.
(In reply to Stéphane Guillou (stragu) from comment #1) > A similar report is Bug 131487. Indeed; to me it seems that any marking for specific language should override the built-in word-boundaries. So for the example (using pseudo-language)"<english>Firewall</english>-Regeln" there should be two components: "Firewall" Using english language rules) and "-Regeln" (using default (German) language rules); maybe the leading minus in "-Regeln" actually causes the problem.
[Automated Action] NeedInfo-To-Unconfirmed
Thank you, Ulrich and Stuart. I am marking this as a duplicate, we can continue the conversation there (I've already added a comment). *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 131487 ***