1. How to modify it can be determined without doubt. For example, "image coding" is misspelled as "image coding".
It doesn't matter whether this situation is changed or not, because the examiner may send you a notice to modify it, or the examiner may directly modify it on his behalf;
2. It is meaningless to determine how to modify, for example, the unit "nm" is misspelled as "mm"
In this case, it is easy to go beyond the scope when making corrections. If it is corrected, it is definitely meaningless to determine from other parts of the application document that it is indeed nm and not mm. If it can be proved, it can be corrected or modified when replying to the notice. However, if it cannot be proved that the modification is not out of range, then the modification will lead to the modification out of range. In this case, the following suggestions are made:
2. 1 If the application has not been made public, it is recommended to reapply for a new patent and immediately revoke the current patent application.
2.2 If the application has been released, there is no better way to deal with it. At this time, try to find some documents that prove that "nm" is indeed misspelled as "mm" (it is best to have the same expression as the current patent application) to convince the examiner to modify it within the scope.
To sum up: if it is not beyond the scope, it doesn't matter whether it is corrected or not; If it is out of range, it is useless to correct it or not.
If it has not been made public:
The typo of 1. 1 leads to unclear claims or incorrect scope of protection (that is, there are substantive problems), and it may be corrected.