RE: Translation questions
Alexandra, First of all, I wanted to confirm the excellent advice you got from Ann Zdunczyk, Diane Gaskill and others. I have worked for a LSP (Language Services Provider, or Translation Vendor) for nearly 10 years and with FrameMaker for nearly 20 years; about 80% of our clients use FrameMaker for documentation. Yes, translating Word projects do tend to cost more for many of the reasons listed earlier (embedded graphics being replaced, etc.) Word files are prone to crash when file size exceeds 1 meg and section breaks are extremely troublesome with auto numbering and other formatting. We have actually assisted some customers in migrating from Word to FrameMaker in order to reduce their translation costs. (This is appropriate for customers who have technical document content that resembles a FrameMaker project in complexity and volume.) TRADOS uses a form of RTF file format, so technically Word files do not have to be converted to be translated via TRADOS. However, this does not make Word files less expensive to translate. In pre-processing for translation, FrameMaker files must be saved to MIF, and then S_Tagger converts the MIF to a customized form of RTF required by Trados. Special RTF character tags are used to label text as fixed-tags, movable-tags, do-not-translate text, or regular to-be-translated text. The pre-processing engineering steps required for FrameMaker files do not adversely affect the project budget. All of our customers send us binary FrameMaker files. It is less expensive to have your LSP do the save as MIF for you, rather than take up the extra server space (and FTP bandwidth) with large MIF files. Graphics are always externally referenced, and a relative pathname to the graphics directory can help reduce project time. There is some publishing time required by the LSP on post-translated files. Structured FrameMaker saved as XML has several advantages over basic FrameMaker, in translation post-processing and publishing, which I will cover in my presentation Optimizing FrameMaker for Localization (translation) at the upcoming FrameMaker 2006 Chautauqua. Several people who responded to your questions mentioned that LSPs will charge you for translating every word even if there is up-to-date translation memory. Though this is technically true, be aware that previously translated text (an exact match in Trados) will be charged at a much lower rate than a fuzzy match or un-translated text. Your LSP can use special tools to compare your latest FrameMaker content with the previous version and get an accurate word count on how much content has changed. I also wanted to affirm what someone else said: you own the translation memory that your LSP creates or updates. You can request it at any time if you decide to try out a different vendor. Correctly updated Translation Memory (TM) is often a problem with less-expensive vendors. TM is becoming more portable due to new standards like TMX. I have occasionally observed clients trying out cheaper translation vendors; if they are using FrameMaker, they nearly always come back to us. Cheaper per-word rates do not make up for poor translation quality, lack of TM management and lost document integrity in your FrameMaker files. Maxwell Hoffmann Manager of Consulting Training Solutions ENLASO Corporation T: 805 494 9571 * F: 805 435 1920 E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ENLASO Corporation provides quality enterprise language solutions and exceeds client expectations through continuing research, development, and implementation of effective localization processes and technologies. Visit: www.translate.com for more information or to subscribe to our complimentary localization newsletter. = Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 From: Alexandra Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Translation questions To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hello, We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. [snip] If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date
Translation questions
Alexandra, First of all, I wanted to confirm the excellent advice you got from Ann Zdunczyk, Diane Gaskill and others. I have worked for a LSP (Language Services Provider, or Translation Vendor) for nearly 10 years and with FrameMaker for nearly 20 years; about 80% of our clients use FrameMaker for documentation. Yes, translating Word projects do tend to cost more for many of the reasons listed earlier (embedded graphics being replaced, etc.) Word files are prone to crash when file size exceeds 1 meg and section breaks are extremely troublesome with auto numbering and other formatting. We have actually assisted some customers in migrating from Word to FrameMaker in order to reduce their translation costs. (This is appropriate for customers who have technical document content that resembles a FrameMaker project in complexity and volume.) TRADOS uses a form of RTF file format, so technically Word files do not have to be converted to be translated via TRADOS. However, this does not make Word files less expensive to translate. In pre-processing for translation, FrameMaker files must be saved to MIF, and then S_Tagger converts the MIF to a customized form of RTF required by Trados. Special RTF character tags are used to label text as fixed-tags, movable-tags, do-not-translate text, or regular to-be-translated text. The pre-processing engineering steps required for FrameMaker files do not adversely affect the project budget. All of our customers send us binary FrameMaker files. It is less expensive to have your LSP do the "save as MIF" for you, rather than take up the extra server space (and FTP bandwidth) with large MIF files. Graphics are always externally referenced, and a relative pathname to the graphics directory can help reduce project time. There is some publishing time required by the LSP on post-translated files. Structured FrameMaker saved as XML has several advantages over basic FrameMaker, in translation post-processing and publishing, which I will cover in my presentation "Optimizing FrameMaker for Localization (translation)" at the upcoming FrameMaker 2006 Chautauqua. Several people who responded to your questions mentioned that LSPs will charge you for translating "every word" even if there is up-to-date translation memory. Though this is technically true, be aware that previously translated text (an "exact match" in Trados) will be charged at a much lower rate than a "fuzzy match" or un-translated text. Your LSP can use special tools to compare your latest FrameMaker content with the previous version and get an accurate word count on how much content has changed. I also wanted to affirm what someone else said: you "own" the translation memory that your LSP creates or updates. You can request it at any time if you decide to try out a different vendor. Correctly updated Translation Memory (TM) is often a problem with less-expensive vendors. TM is becoming more portable due to new standards like TMX. I have occasionally observed clients trying out "cheaper" translation vendors; if they are using FrameMaker, they nearly always come back to us. Cheaper per-word rates do not make up for poor translation quality, lack of TM management and lost document integrity in your FrameMaker files. Maxwell Hoffmann Manager of Consulting & Training Solutions ENLASO Corporation T: 805 494 9571 * F: 805 435 1920 E: mhoffmann at translate.com ENLASO Corporation provides quality enterprise language solutions and exceeds client expectations through continuing research, development, and implementation of effective localization processes and technologies. Visit: www.translate.com for more information or to subscribe to our complimentary localization newsletter. = Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 From: "Alexandra Duffy" <adu...@nemetschek.net> Subject: Translation questions To: Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello, We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. [snip] If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use T
Re: Translation questions
Alexandra, as a French translator and technical writer using FrameMaker as well as Trados, I totally agree with what other people have said on this issue : if the translation company knows its job, you ought to send FM files in the native language and have them sent back translated and perfectly laid out, in FM format and with an updated TM (Translation memory). Any change you might do in a file will appear clearly to the translator when translating under Trados : you do not have to do anything (add change bars, create Excel files with change records or whatever...) except send your files and pay only for the translation of changed parts. Yours, Mathieu. From: Karen Story [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Translation questions Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 10:14:06 -0700 Hi Alexandra, To save money, we break our books into small files, and only hand off the files that have changed. This saves us a lot of money in translation costs, but it means that we have to do all the file integration and resolve missing fonts and a few other issues. Every so often we hand off the whole book, because the older sections get out of alignment with the translation memory. If your compay can afford it, it's best to always hand off everything to the vendor. We hand off FrameMaker files, not mif files. * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? Yes, but they will charge you for every word, even the words that were already translated. * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? Yes, but this costs money. * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? Don't use Word! The Frame to Mif to Trados and back process works just fine. -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 From: Alexandra Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Translation questions To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/bobitch%40hotmail.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info
RE: Translation questions
Alexandra, I definitely echo Karen's advice about Word. We have some Word docs (don't even ask)and two vendors we use told us that they will charge us 25% more to translate docs in Word than docs in Frame. Why? Because the graphics are all embedded in Word and they have to take them out and replace them with the translated ones. This is a manual process and takes time. And they charge for -everything- they do. The other reason is that they expect Word to crash a few times during the process and that they will have to do some of the work over. And then there is the autonumbering... Well, everybody knows how stable Word is, right? Most vendors accept FM files. You do not need to save the files to MIF. One of the advantages of sending FM files is that they are binary and are a lot smaller than the ASCII MIF files. Zipping the files solves the size problem, but saving to MIF is an extra step that you don't need to do. I'm not sure that Karen is right about vendors charging you for words that have already been translated when you are using a TM. I'm pretty sure ours does not, but check with your vendor to be sure. Diane = -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Karen Story Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 10:14 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Translation questions Hi Alexandra, To save money, we break our books into small files, and only hand off the files that have changed. This saves us a lot of money in translation costs, but it means that we have to do all the file integration and resolve missing fonts and a few other issues. Every so often we hand off the whole book, because the older sections get out of alignment with the translation memory. If your compay can afford it, it's best to always hand off everything to the vendor. We hand off FrameMaker files, not mif files. * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? Yes, but they will charge you for every word, even the words that were already translated. * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? Yes, but this costs money. * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? Don't use Word! The Frame to Mif to Trados and back process works just fine. -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 From: Alexandra Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Translation questions To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input
Translation questions
Alexandra, as a French translator and technical writer using FrameMaker as well as Trados, I totally agree with what other people have said on this issue : if the translation company knows its job, you ought to send FM files in the native language and have them sent back translated and perfectly laid out, in FM format and with an updated TM (Translation memory). Any change you might do in a file will appear clearly to the translator when translating under Trados : you do not have to do anything (add change bars, create Excel files with change records or whatever...) except send your files and pay only for the translation of changed parts. Yours, Mathieu. >From: "Karen Story" >To: >Subject: Re: Translation questions >Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 10:14:06 -0700 > >Hi Alexandra, > >To save money, we break our books into small files, and only hand off the >files that have changed. This saves us a lot of money in translation costs, >but it means that we have to do all the file integration and resolve >missing fonts and a few other issues. Every so often we hand off the whole >book, because the older sections get out of alignment with the translation >memory. If your compay can afford it, it's best to always hand off >everything to the vendor. > >We hand off FrameMaker files, not mif files. > >* Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to >identify what has changed? > >Yes, but they will charge you for every word, even the words that were >already translated. > >* What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they >build a new one based on new files? > >Yes, but this costs money. > >* Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used >Word? > >Don't use Word! The Frame to Mif to Trados and back process works just >fine. > >------ > >Message: 2 >Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 >From: "Alexandra Duffy" >Subject: Translation questions >To: >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >Hello, > >FM 6.0 unstructured >ePro WWH 5.0 > >We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 >pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was >accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses >TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. >The translator did create the database files that are used for >facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back >from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we >question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker >files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to >us. > >Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing >difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last >version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing >is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, >added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a >Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do >not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time >this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. > >I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, >but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what >TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs >claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use >FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to >structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but >at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. >is cost- and time-prohibitive. > >If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text >through several versions, I would like to know: > >* What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move >the translation up to the next version? >* Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to >identify what has changed? >* What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they >build a new one based on new files? >* Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used >Word? > >I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would >appreciate your input. >Please, can you CC: aduffy at nemetschek.net, as I am on the digest. > >Thanks, > >Alexandra Duffy >Senior Technical Writer >Nemetschek NA >___ > > >You are currently subscri
Translation questions
Alexandra, I definitely echo Karen's advice about Word. We have some Word docs (don't even ask)and two vendors we use told us that they will charge us 25% more to translate docs in Word than docs in Frame. Why? Because the graphics are all embedded in Word and they have to take them out and replace them with the translated ones. This is a manual process and takes time. And they charge for -everything- they do. The other reason is that they expect Word to crash a few times during the process and that they will have to do some of the work over. And then there is the autonumbering... Well, everybody knows how stable Word is, right? Most vendors accept FM files. You do not need to save the files to MIF. One of the advantages of sending FM files is that they are binary and are a lot smaller than the ASCII MIF files. Zipping the files solves the size problem, but saving to MIF is an extra step that you don't need to do. I'm not sure that Karen is right about vendors charging you for words that have already been translated when you are using a TM. I'm pretty sure ours does not, but check with your vendor to be sure. Diane = -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+dgcaller=earthlink@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+dgcaller=earthlink.net at lists.frameusers.com]On Behalf Of Karen Story Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 10:14 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Translation questions Hi Alexandra, To save money, we break our books into small files, and only hand off the files that have changed. This saves us a lot of money in translation costs, but it means that we have to do all the file integration and resolve missing fonts and a few other issues. Every so often we hand off the whole book, because the older sections get out of alignment with the translation memory. If your compay can afford it, it's best to always hand off everything to the vendor. We hand off FrameMaker files, not mif files. * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? Yes, but they will charge you for every word, even the words that were already translated. * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? Yes, but this costs money. * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? Don't use Word! The Frame to Mif to Trados and back process works just fine. -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 From: "Alexandra Duffy" <adu...@nemetschek.net> Subject: Translation questions To: Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we
Re: Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, To save money, we break our books into small files, and only hand off the files that have changed. This saves us a lot of money in translation costs, but it means that we have to do all the file integration and resolve missing fonts and a few other issues. Every so often we hand off the whole book, because the older sections get out of alignment with the translation memory. If your compay can afford it, it's best to always hand off everything to the vendor. We hand off FrameMaker files, not mif files. * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? Yes, but they will charge you for every word, even the words that were already translated. * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? Yes, but this costs money. * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? Don't use Word! The Frame to Mif to Trados and back process works just fine. -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 From: Alexandra Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Translation questions To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, To save money, we break our books into small files, and only hand off the files that have changed. This saves us a lot of money in translation costs, but it means that we have to do all the file integration and resolve missing fonts and a few other issues. Every so often we hand off the whole book, because the older sections get out of alignment with the translation memory. If your compay can afford it, it's best to always hand off everything to the vendor. We hand off FrameMaker files, not mif files. * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? Yes, but they will charge you for every word, even the words that were already translated. * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? Yes, but this costs money. * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? Don't use Word! The Frame to Mif to Trados and back process works just fine. -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:12:13 -0400 From: "Alexandra Duffy" <adu...@nemetschek.net> Subject: Translation questions To: Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: aduffy at nemetschek.net, as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA
Translation questions
Thanks to everyone who responded to my questions. We are definitely aware that the lowest bidder is not always the best choice; however, the choice of vendors is not within my control. One of the reasons I asked my question was in an effort to potentially change vendors. Thanks again for your information, Alexandra Duffy
Translation questions
Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, Considering the amount of time you've just spent tagging your Frame files with the changed text, not to mention the amount of correcting you did to the Spanish files once they were returned by your translator, do you still think the lowest bidder saved your company any money? Before my company wised up, we used to send our translators a Frame file containing only the changes made in our manuals. This was time consuming in two ways: creating the file and reintegrating the translated text into the translated manuals. With 18 supported languages it was a full time job for me. The idea of having a translation database, or translation memory, is to identify text that already exists in translated form and separating it from text requiring localization. In a proper work flow you should never have to go through what you just did. Did you communicate the corrections to your translators after the first round of localization? No translator is perfect, that's why we have our translations proofread by our technicians at our regional offices. Any corrections they suggest go back to the translators, and eventually get added to the translation database. There should never be an issue of an out-of-date translation database unless you flip between two different translators with different databases. Any changes made to your manuals have to go back to the translator. We finally sourced a translation company that makes very efficient use of translation memory. We send them the complete manuals in native Frame format, along with all the graphics for the manual. We get back translated Frame and PDF files ready to print and send along to our customers. As an aside, if you've made extensive use of generated files (TOC, Index), autonumbering, cross-references, conditional text, etc. in Frame, I wouldn't even contemplate migrating all of that to Word. You'll want to slit your wrists trying to get that piece of ordure to do what Frame does. Just my two-cents. Best of luck. Berny Gagné Lead Technical Writer Husky Injection Molding Systems Bolton, Ontario, Canada -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alexandra Duffy Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 12:12 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Translation questions Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http
RE: Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, I have been working in the translation area since the early 90's, and now do freelance work for numerouse translation houses. I have been working with unstructured framemaker since version 3.0 Unix. If you find a good translation agency then you will have an up to date memory (database) for your documents. You should not have to do any extra work on you Framemaker documents at all. When you send an updated document or even a new document to the translation agency they will do an analysis of your document(s) against the memory (database) that they have on file. This will allow them to see how much of the document will have to be is new. They will then use this memory (database) to translate you document(s). This will update your memory (database) to contain the new or changed information from your new document(s). Before I became a freelancer I worked for ATT's and Lucent Technologies' in-house translation department. We worked heavily in Framemaker and used Trados as our Translation Memory software. We were very satisfied with the way Trados worked with these files. Later we out-sourced a lot of out translation and DTP work. We would receive the documents from the translation agency and as a normal practice we would regenerate any generated text (TOC, Index etc.). In the beginning we would find problems with the regeneration, usually in the Index. We would fix this but would also let the translation agency know what problems we were finding. One thing you want to remember is that the memory (database) is yours. When you work with a translation agency make sure that you discuss this with them up front. If you decide to move to a new agency you can then provide them with the memory, otherwise the new agency will have to start from scratch with your translation. There are was to recreate the memory (database) but it will cost you. For one of the translation agencies I work with I use Trados or SDLX to do analysis on there documents and in a lot of cases do the DTP once it comes back from the translators. I still work in Framemaker along with most of the other desktop publishing software and graphic software on the market. If you have additional questions please let me know and I will do my best to answer. Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, As you may know, Trados is now a part of SDL International. I have a contact there who can provide answers to any questions you have about Trados. I will send you his contact information offline. Ann's message contains good advice, especially about the TM. Also, since you are creating and sending MIFs to the your L10N vendor, you can save a bit of time with a great FM plugin called MIFsave (saves all FM files in a book to MIF). I've had it so long I've forgotten who wrote it (probably Bruce or Chris) but I am pretty sure you can find it on the FrameUsers website. If you read the white paper I think you mean, I really need to find time to update it. Processes and tools have changed a lot since I wrote it (for example, Trados now uses MIF directly). I'm working on it when I have time. I also would like to make a comment on L10N vendors. AS you may now realize, the lowest bidder is not always the best value for your money. The most important considerations when hiring an L10N vendor are that they have technical knowledge in the product area you are in and that they can do the job you need them to do. From your email, it sounds like it might be a good idea to consider another vendor. It might cost you a little more up front, but but if the vendor has a good QA process and provides better quality, the savings in time and work would be worth it, not to mention the reduction in worry and frustration. If I can help further, please let me know. You can send me a check via email. :-) Best, Diane Gaskill = -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alexandra Duffy Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 9:12 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Translation questions Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dgcaller%40earthlink.net Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL
Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, Considering the amount of time you've just spent tagging your Frame files with the changed text, not to mention the amount of correcting you did to the Spanish files once they were returned by your translator, do you still think the lowest bidder saved your company any money? Before my company wised up, we used to send our translators a Frame file containing only the changes made in our manuals. This was time consuming in two ways: creating the file and reintegrating the translated text into the translated manuals. With 18 supported languages it was a full time job for me. The idea of having a translation database, or translation memory, is to identify text that already exists in translated form and separating it from text requiring localization. In a proper work flow you should never have to go through what you just did. Did you communicate the corrections to your translators after the first round of localization? No translator is perfect, that's why we have our translations proofread by our technicians at our regional offices. Any corrections they suggest go back to the translators, and eventually get added to the translation database. There should never be an issue of an out-of-date translation database unless you flip between two different translators with different databases. Any changes made to your manuals have to go back to the translator. We finally sourced a translation company that makes very efficient use of translation memory. We send them the complete manuals in native Frame format, along with all the graphics for the manual. We get back translated Frame and PDF files ready to print and send along to our customers. As an aside, if you've made extensive use of generated files (TOC, Index), autonumbering, cross-references, conditional text, etc. in Frame, I wouldn't even contemplate migrating all of that to Word. You'll want to slit your wrists trying to get that piece of ordure to do what Frame does. Just my two-cents. Best of luck. Berny Gagn? Lead Technical Writer Husky Injection Molding Systems Bolton, Ontario, Canada -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+bgagne=husky...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+bgagne=husky.ca at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Alexandra Duffy Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 12:12 PM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Translation questions Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: aduffy at nemetschek.net, as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as bgagne at husky.ca. Send list messages to framers
Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, I have been working in the translation area since the early 90's, and now do freelance work for numerouse translation houses. I have been working with unstructured framemaker since version 3.0 Unix. If you find a good translation agency then you will have an up to date memory (database) for your documents. You should not have to do any extra work on you Framemaker documents at all. When you send an updated document or even a new document to the translation agency they will do an analysis of your document(s) against the memory (database) that they have on file. This will allow them to see how much of the document will have to be is new. They will then use this memory (database) to translate you document(s). This will update your memory (database) to contain the new or changed information from your new document(s). Before I became a freelancer I worked for AT's and Lucent Technologies' in-house translation department. We worked heavily in Framemaker and used Trados as our Translation Memory software. We were very satisfied with the way Trados worked with these files. Later we out-sourced a lot of out translation and DTP work. We would receive the documents from the translation agency and as a normal practice we would regenerate any generated text (TOC, Index etc.). In the beginning we would find problems with the regeneration, usually in the Index. We would fix this but would also let the translation agency know what problems we were finding. One thing you want to remember is that the memory (database) is yours. When you work with a translation agency make sure that you discuss this with them up front. If you decide to move to a new agency you can then provide them with the memory, otherwise the new agency will have to start from scratch with your translation. There are was to recreate the memory (database) but it will cost you. For one of the translation agencies I work with I use Trados or SDLX to do analysis on there documents and in a lot of cases do the DTP once it comes back from the translators. I still work in Framemaker along with most of the other desktop publishing software and graphic software on the market. If you have additional questions please let me know and I will do my best to answer. Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout & Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com **
Translation questions
Hi Alexandra, As you may know, Trados is now a part of SDL International. I have a contact there who can provide answers to any questions you have about Trados. I will send you his contact information offline. Ann's message contains good advice, especially about the TM. Also, since you are creating and sending MIFs to the your L10N vendor, you can save a bit of time with a great FM plugin called MIFsave (saves all FM files in a book to MIF). I've had it so long I've forgotten who wrote it (probably Bruce or Chris) but I am pretty sure you can find it on the FrameUsers website. If you read the white paper I think you mean, I really need to find time to update it. Processes and tools have changed a lot since I wrote it (for example, Trados now uses MIF directly). I'm working on it when I have time. I also would like to make a comment on L10N vendors. AS you may now realize, the lowest bidder is not always the best value for your money. The most important considerations when hiring an L10N vendor are that they have technical knowledge in the product area you are in and that they can do the job you need them to do. From your email, it sounds like it might be a good idea to consider another vendor. It might cost you a little more up front, but but if the vendor has a good QA process and provides better quality, the savings in time and work would be worth it, not to mention the reduction in worry and frustration. If I can help further, please let me know. You can send me a check via email. :-) Best, Diane Gaskill = -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+dgcaller=earthlink@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+dgcaller=earthlink.net at lists.frameusers.com]On Behalf Of Alexandra Duffy Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 9:12 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Translation questions Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: aduffy at nemetschek.net, as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as dgcaller at earthlink.net. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dgcaller%40earthlink.net Send administrative questions to lisa at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Translation questions
It was Bruce Foster. http://home.comcast.net/~bruce.foster/products.htm Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout & Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+azdunczyk=triad.rr@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+azdunczyk=triad.rr.com at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Diane Gaskill Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:36 PM To: Alexandra Duffy; framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Translation questions Hi Alexandra, As you may know, Trados is now a part of SDL International. I have a contact there who can provide answers to any questions you have about Trados. I will send you his contact information offline. Ann's message contains good advice, especially about the TM. Also, since you are creating and sending MIFs to the your L10N vendor, you can save a bit of time with a great FM plugin called MIFsave (saves all FM files in a book to MIF). I've had it so long I've forgotten who wrote it (probably Bruce or Chris) but I am pretty sure you can find it on the FrameUsers website. If you read the white paper I think you mean, I really need to find time to update it. Processes and tools have changed a lot since I wrote it (for example, Trados now uses MIF directly). I'm working on it when I have time. I also would like to make a comment on L10N vendors. AS you may now realize, the lowest bidder is not always the best value for your money. The most important considerations when hiring an L10N vendor are that they have technical knowledge in the product area you are in and that they can do the job you need them to do. From your email, it sounds like it might be a good idea to consider another vendor. It might cost you a little more up front, but but if the vendor has a good QA process and provides better quality, the savings in time and work would be worth it, not to mention the reduction in worry and frustration. If I can help further, please let me know. You can send me a check via email. :-) Best, Diane Gaskill = -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+dgcaller=earthlink@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+dgcaller=earthlink.net at lists.frameusers.com]On Behalf Of Alexandra Duffy Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 9:12 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Translation questions Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: aduffy at nemetschek.net, as I am on the digest. Th
Translation questions
Hello, FM 6.0 unstructured ePro WWH 5.0 We recently translated our documentation set (two manuals, about 1,600 pages) into Spanish. This wasn't a very smooth process, but it was accomplished by sending our .mif files to the translator, who uses TRADOS. The translator was selected based on the lowest bid. The translator did create the database files that are used for facilitating future translation; however, once we got the files back from them, there were so many errors and changes required that we question the usefulness of the database files. Our Spanish FrameMaker files are now significantly different from the files that they gave to us. Now we are moving on to the next version of our software, and facing difficulties understanding how to mark what has changed since the last version, and translate only the new/changed text. What we ended up doing is comparing our English files in FrameMaker, and, using the CMP files, added the new/changed text into the Spanish files, marked with a Translation condition. This was a huge chore. I just KNOW that others do not do it this way. The managers are not happy with the amount of time this took, and we aren't happy because it was very tedious. I have read the white paper about translation that is often mentioned, but the process is still not clear to me. I don't really know what TRADOS can do and how the translators use it with .mif files. (The PTBs claim that TRADOS works *much better* with Word, and why do use FrameMaker anyway?) I also know that many of you have switched to structured FrameMaker to solve some translation issues (like these?) but at the moment, switching to structured with our small, very busy dept. is cost- and time-prohibitive. If you are still using unstructured FrameMaker and translating your text through several versions, I would like to know: * What your companies do to mark text that has changed? How do you move the translation up to the next version? * Can't translators take the latest mif files from you and use TRADOS to identify what has changed? * What if the database from the translator is out-of-date? Can't they build a new one based on new files? * Is there really a difference in this process (re:TRADOS) if we used Word? I think we're making this way harder than it needs to be and would appreciate your input. Please, can you CC: aduffy at nemetschek.net, as I am on the digest. Thanks, Alexandra Duffy Senior Technical Writer Nemetschek NA
