Skip to content

docs: document the scripts field on dictionary contributions #2

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
hamidfzm merged 1 commit into from
Jul 17, 2026
Merged

docs: document the scripts field on dictionary contributions #2

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions docs/api-reference.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -160,6 +160,8 @@ ctx.spellcheck.registerDictionary({

Real dictionaries are megabytes of Hunspell text; ship them as package assets and read them with `ctx.assets` (see the [recipe](recipes.md#spell-check-dictionary)) rather than embedding them in `main.js`.

The optional `scripts` field declares the ISO 15924 script codes the dictionary covers, e.g. `scripts: ["Arab"]`. When omitted the host infers it from `language` via CLDR likely-subtags, so `fa` already covers Arabic-script words. Words are checked only against dictionaries covering their script and skipped entirely when no enabled dictionary does, which keeps mixed-language notes clean. Casing is normalized, composite codes (`Jpan`, `Kore`, `Hans`, `Hant`) expand to their constituent scripts, and an unknown name logs a warning and contributes no coverage. Hosts that predate the field ignore it and infer instead, so declaring it is always safe.

## `ctx.notify`

```ts
Expand Down