At next week’s ATA annual conference in San Diego, I’ll be giving a short talk for some of the translation tools vendors who are exhibiting at the conference. So here’s a question for you: what suggestions or requests do you have for your translation tool creator(s)? You can submit comments on any topic, but I’m specifically interested in tools interoperability: what suggestions can we give to tools vendors so that we don’t have to reinvent our workflow whenever we switch tools? If you have some feedback that you’d like me to include in this (very short) talk, please submit a comment with the name of the tool(s) you use and your specific suggestions. Thank you!
Reader Interactions
Comments
Trackbacks
-
[…] translation software vendors who were exhibiting at the conference. This was the motivation for my information-gathering post before the conference. And I have to tell you, the discussion was great. It deserves its own post […]
-
[…] of last week’s ATA conference, I asked readers what you would like to tell your translation tool vendor. And with 27 comments (although some of those were me!), the post generated a lot of activity and […]
-
[…] of last week’s ATA conference, I asked readers what you would like to tell your translation tool vendor. [And this articles brings the response] in a nutshell, from the software vendors’ point of […]
Hi Corinne,
I would beg them to use the same keyboard shortcuts for equivalent commands. We are compelled to jump from Trados to Idiom (or Wordfast or whatever) to please clients, and thus from shortcut to shortcut for the same command. Closing a segment, for instance, should have a “universal” shortcut valid for all CAT tools.
Have a great time in San Diego!
Best,
Maria Jose
I’m still not using a translation tool because they seem imposing and not user friendly. I’ve tried the free version of Wordfast but inept as I am cannot understand it. The idea of having to pay for lessons to really learn how to use it is wildly discouraging. I’d like a tool that is Mac/PC compatible, with zero issues, one that automatically links to available databases when I open them on the Internet. I’d like to be able to use TEnT tools but often translate from literary source texts that are not in digital form; I suppose in those cases, it’s just a moot point? Or not?
I would second Maria’s request: let us have standard shortcuts or at least be able to change them.
When I switch from one tool to another, the key combination for writing to the TM in one is the same as clear segment in the other. I’ve actually resorted to a piece of tape over the keyboard to keep me from undoing all my work!
And obviously, I detest proprietary formats that don’t let me use the tool I want. It reminds me of all the incompatibilities we used to have to deal with for word processors and modem protocols. In the end, this proprietary stance meant that a single product emerged as the de facto standard–one big winner and a lot of losers!
First, I would like Mac/PC compatibility. Second, all program developers should provide a comprehensive, searchable, well written manual for the user, that comes with the program and is for non-geeks who have never used the program before. There should not be a need for the plethora of “Take Control” books that I have had to buy because there is no decent usable manual for many programs (and operating systems). It is scandalous that companies charge their customers to learn how to use their programs. I worked for a couple of years in a bank trying to teach a financial analysis program to loan officers and my task was to make a manual that someone who had not developed the program could understand. It can and should be done.
I’d like companies to keep in mind that plenty freelancers use domain name servers in their home and that freelance versions of products should function on such domains. I have to go through a negotiation palaver every time I buy or upgrade my particular choice of tool to get a version that will work for my setup at a manageable price.
I’m with my colleagues on user-definable keyboard shortcuts and good documentation – at the pricing for our tools, it should be included instead of sold. I like the current development to allow us to edit the source with the target in one go, but it has to become more reliable – Trados 2011 sometimes allows this now, often it doesn’t, and OmegaT doesn’t at all. I would have a pop-up warn users of the copyright and contract/secrecy issues whenever they add an online MT source. And please tell SDL to make their TM recognize and ignore soft hyphens and non-breaking spaces when calculating similarity! It’s ridiculous to drop a 100% match to under 70% just because the author chose to correct the text flow. This might be applicable to other suites too.
Thank you for trying to move things, Mrs. McKay!
I think it would be good if there would be a more universal standard export format for translation memories; like TMX, TXT, etc. As it stands, it is sometimes difficult to import existing TMs to CAT tools or MT systems.
I agree with medical translator. Work providers using Trados routinely send me memory outputs in .txt format. I use MemoQ and I have to run it through Trados (which I happen to have still – the older version that is) to get it into the MQ TM. Otherwise I’d have to keep asking the agency to output in .tmx. There should be a standard output format so that we can deal with this without having to ask or run this extra routine.
I agree with Medical and Lucy, to always export TM’s in TMX-format. Another issue that has sometimes made it hard for me to use another tool than the one the client uses, is that the tags change places in the units, which defeats the purpose of interoperability. This has happened to me when using Wordfast and Trados Studio.
+1 on Mac compatibility. There aren’t enough CATs/TEnTs running on Macs natively.
Another suggestion: Right now all tool developers are building (or have built) their own proprietary client/server technology. Instead, they should provide standardised, well-documented web-services APIs for TM and term exchange. As a translator, I would simply enter connection details for my client’s server TM/termDB into the CAT tool and start translating away (instead of emailing around files that are sometimes in incompatible formats).
Great question and excellent suggestions in the comments.
Indeed, TM interoperability is probably the number one request.
I’d also love interoperability on a file level, i.e. we could have just one file format such as XLIFF supported by all tools.
It could also be great if all CAT tools processed all tags in a unified manner since today, one file processed with two different tools results in two different TMs because of incompatible tags.
Best regards,
Roman
Well written manuals (maybe they can hire someone to write them in the series The Missing Manuals)
Interoperability
Export formats
Thank you
LSánchez
Hi Corinne!
Thanks for this great idea. I agree with Maria and with Caitlin, and I am also for a standard shortcut for all CAT Tools.
Shortcust are really time savers and our memories cannot recall every shortcut (even in Trados 2007, there is one for TagEditor, a different one for Word, etc..)I wish we could have a global and unique one for all!!
Heaps of luck in San Diego!
All the best,
Dolores
Thanks everyone! I really appreciate these suggestions and I think that the tools vendors will too. Keep them coming if you have other ideas!
There’s a small thing that bugs me about SDL. They sell their products as “Freelance” and “Professional” – as though freelancers aren’t professionals! “Enterprise” might be more appropriate for the “professional” products (although perhaps a little Star Trek-ish!) Does this bug anyone else?
@Jayne, there has been a severe lack of interoperability and honest collaboration in the industry every since I joined (initially as in-house translators) back in 2000. No idea where this comes from, but there seems to be a certain paranoia when it comes to such topics as open standards and their implementation. There are some notable exceptions, such as Kilgray/MemoQ, Heartsome, and to some extent Welocalize/Globalsight. In general, though, the atmosphere seems to be one of suspicion rather than collaboration.
Regarding the differences between SDL’s freelance and professional editions, just have a look at their current homepage image to see how they picture translators at work: http://www.sdl.com/ 🙂
I also agree with Joan on the need for manuals, Christopher on soft hyphens and non-breaking spaces, and with everyone above asking for better interoperability in general.
One document I worked with in particular was a nightmare to share between tools: I couldn’t import the Trados 2007 bilingual document into Studio 2011 or memoQ (the document was long and had footnotes, which memoQ handles differently. No excuse for Studio not handling it though).
I’ve also had difficulty opening some Wordfast bilingual docments in memoQ or Studio 2011, and importing a Wordfast translation memory into Studio 2011.
When translating a memoQ bilingual Word document in Wordfast Classic, the formatting was not retained – there was no bold or italic, and paragraph breaks were inserted at the end of segments.
The answer that tends to be given is “standards” – and SDL also mentions the OpenExchange, which allows people to develop and share their own software tools to address problems such as these. But I’d really like to see more commitment to real interoperability from the vendors.
Just to echo other comments on interoperability:
XLIFF is supposed to be the open standard for inter-tool doc exchange, but tools that apply this standard still add their proprietary stamp to it (SDLXLIFF in the case of Studio, MXLIFF in the case of MemSource…) rendering it incompatible along the way.
I’d love to see a truly standard file format that can be opened – without any doctoring – in any tool.
I would like to see more vendors providing “How to” videos rather than just Help files which can sometimes be difficult to follow. I import a lot of Trados ttx files into MemoQ to work on them there and it was the “How to” video created by one of the MemoQ users that got me started with this workflow.
Before long I expect I will need to import docx files from Trados Suite (2009/2011) into MemoQ. This has to be done in the form of an sdlxliff file that is created in Trados Studio and then imported. I’d really love to have a “How to” video for this procedure. And this applies not only to MemoQ but to any tool that claims to be interoperable with with various Trados versions.
Hi Corinne.
To add to the above, it would be nice if vendors didn’t remove features or change behaviour from one release to another.
The documentation should detail ALL changes to the software.
More rigorous release testing would iron out more bugs and reduce the hassle for translators. Maybe they could pay some of us to beta test releases for them. I’ve done lots of that kind of thing in a former life.
In this of all industries, manuals should be professionally translated into the relevant languages.
And configurable shortcuts, absolutely :).
… by “change behaviour”, BTW, I mean either downgrading functionality or altering the way the config settings or the interface works without letting users know.
Another thought in parallel to spaces and hyphens: Please, please, please allow us to configure typographic quote signs!
I’m sick of having to type Alt+0132 („) and Alt+0147 (“) or Alt+0171, Alt+0160 (« followed by a non-breaking space) and Alt+0160, Alt+0187 (for non-breaking space and ») instead of just using the ” and have it automatically be replaced by the correct quote. I know American software companies come by with less quote signs than what a lot of other languages prescribe. Still, do us the favour, please. Same goes for single quotes ( ‘ -> ’ ).
Thank you very much!
Hello Christopher — Wordfast does have a feature that automatically uses the quotation marks of the target language, so there is no need for Alt-code typing to create them. It’s under Edit > Preferences > Translations, then the check box called “Use smart quotes”.
Thank you for the info, Meghan. In Trados, one has to come by with “smart inserts”, that is, I type Ctrl+6 / 7 / 8 and Trados inserts a pair of EN / DE / FR typographic quotes in most formats (smart inserts are configured per file type). Given how transparently they are placed in current Office suites (MS, OOo, LibO, …), it is astonishing that a product *for professional linguists* would fail at it.
Hi Corinne, are you going to post the results here in this thread? Would be interesting to see what the different tools-vendors have to say to the suggestions.
Thanks Martin! I’m not sure that there are any “results” to speak of. The talk I’m giving is over lunch, with the translation tools vendors who are exhibiting at the conference. But if they have any feedback for us, I’ll definitely post it. I’ll try to give them a chance to respond!
I like Fluency’s ability to connect to the internet right there without having to leave the interface, as well as being able to see what dictionaries are available. PC-MAC-Linux compatibility would be wonderful. I use WordFast (MAC and PC) and I am looking into getting another CAT program, but I am not sure which one yet.
Thanks everyone! I’ve compiled these into a PDF and I’ll be sharing it with the tools vendors on Friday. I’ll report back after the conference!
hi Corinne McKay,
i am professional translator services provider , but mostly am using native translator experts because no communication gap because his native translator translate his native language .if we are using tool then communication gap occurs, Exact word translation have no good for understand his native language, because translation have different meaning.