The Linguist is a languages magazine for professional linguists, translators, interpreters, language professionals, language teachers, trainers, students and academics with articles on translation, interpreting, business, government, technology
Issue link: https://thelinguist.uberflip.com/i/220935
FOCUS: CAT TOOLS bilingual data. SDL Trados uses SDLXLIFF, memoQ produces MQXLIFF. If you move an XLIFF file together with the TMX file to another tool, there will be no segmentation issues. So if you want to switch tools, try to get the bilingual file from the first tool instead of using the original file format. Unfortunately, CAT companies tend to adapt XLIFF extensively so that they can save all the information their tool produces. MemoQ will recognise SDLXLIFF files immediately, and can even import Trados Studio SDLPPX packages and produce the corresponding SDLRPX return package. However, using MQXLIFF files in Trados Studio requires the adjustment of the XLIFF import filter (ie, the name 'mqxliff' needs to be added to the list of recognised file extensions in the filter options). Before XLIFF, other bilingual formats were widely used. Because of Trados's widespread use, the TTX format, as well as the bilingual Word format they used until 2007, were often recognised by other tools. To be able to produce the correct output format, however, it is recommended to presegment the files within SDL Trados – ie, to create the format that the file would have after translation by either pre-translating existing text or using the copy-source-to-target feature to create source-source pairs of segments. The second part could then be overwritten with the actual translation. This does not have to be done with XLIFF files, although it is sometimes advisable to pre-segment such files, especially if there are many tags in the document. The diagram below shows how files could be prepared before they are moved between certain tool combinations, including memoQ, Wordfast and SDL Trados Studio. Review process The review process has not traditionally been integrated into translation tools. Translated files were exported out of the TM tools, pdfs were created, and comments in the pdfs were transferred back manually, either to the final target language file or, ideally, to the bilingual files inside the TM tools or to the TM directly. Today, the review process is helped by a table format in Word, which can be produced by memoQ, Trados Studio and other tools. The review files would contain the list of source language segments, the list of target One solution would be to clear the TMX file of all tags and formatting during import language segments, comments, and the information on which status or match rate the segment pair has inside the translation tool (confirmed, rejected, pre-translated). Although those formats look pretty similar in memoQ and Trados Studio, they behave in quite different ways. The Word table from Trados Studio is a review format, meaning all target segments have to be present in the table. Changes can be imported back into Studio, but empty rows, even if completed by the reviewer in the Word table, will not go back into Trados Studio. Also, the file is sensitive to the different versions of Word that could be used to open and edit it, and we see error messages, for example, because the review file in docx format was opened with a lower version of Word. MemoQ provides a file in rtf format. This means it is independent of the editing environment that is used to work on the file – so OpenOffice could be used just as easily as Microsoft Word. It can be used not only as a review format, but also as a translation format, as empty rows can be filled with a translation and will be imported back into the memoQ project. Terminology When it comes to the exchange of terminology data, things are not as clear-cut as with TMs and translation files. Term bases range from a fixed and pre-defined layout to a pre-defined layout with additional customdefinable fields, to a fully customisable layout. This means that there is hardly any common ground for an exchange of data, metadata and structure. Usually the exchange goes through Excel-compatible formats, such as CSV; sometimes through TBX (the term-base exchange format); and occasionally through a tool-specific import/export format, such as SDL MultiTerm XML. Here, we are some way away from interoperability between most tools. True interoperability may never be fully available. But things are getting better, with a more extensive use of standard exchange formats, and initiatives such as Interoperability Now!, where interested parties get together to develop formats and rules that improve interoperability. Interoperability comparison chart 100% and high fuzzy matches (down to 75%) Html Doc Docx InDesign INX InDesign IDML XML TMX from Trados Studio to memoQ 75% reuse 82% reuse 88% reuse 98% reuse 98% reuse 56% reuse TMX from memoQ to Trados Studio 90% reuse 78% reuse 84% reuse 88% reuse 89% reuse 87% reuse Preparation diagram for SDL Trados Studio 11 Studio 11 Package 2011 or SDLXLIFF Package 2009 or SDLXLIFF Studio 11 SDLXLIFF Bilingual Word (segmented) or TTX (legacy (legacy converter) converter) Studio 9 Vol/52 No/6 2013 Trados 2007/ TagEditor Trados 2007/ Word Package Bilingual Word SDLXLIFF (segmented), TTX (segmented) 2009/11 or (legacy or Bilingual Word SDLXLIFF converter) (segmented) memoQ Wordfast Classic Wordfast Pro SDLXLIFF (segmented), Word table TTX (segmented) (batch task or Bilingual Word 'export for review') (segmented) Word DECEMBER 2013/JANUARY 2014 Déjà vu The Linguist 17