TM-Europe 2010_Mixing online+offline projects

The Best of Two Worlds: Mixing Online & Offline Projects
Gabor Farago
translation technology architect
espell group, Hungary

CAT tools: Current challenges
Identify balanced set of CAT/TMS requirements & development directions
Large LSPs and corporate translation depts.
Smaller & medium-sized LSPs and their PMs
Translators (in-house & freelance)
Find common ground to drive tool development (ideal: pluggable, interoperable tools and extensions)
How to avoid a “Blu-ray vs. HD DVD”-like deadlock or the “VHS vs. Betamax” effect
TM-Europe 2010 The Best of Two Worlds: Mixing Online & Offline Projects
Gábor Faragó, espell group 2

2nd generation CAT tools
SDL Trados leading the first generation
Primary LSP CAT environment with few other tools to be supported for diverse needs
Wide translator acceptance
SDL Trados Studio 2009 is not an immediate replacement for T2007, the two must coexist for a while
Migration to a 2nd generation tool important for better collaboration & workflow

LSP concerns
Does this mean LSPs have to support:
SDL Trados 2007+2009
Otherpreferred 2nd generation collaborative/online tool(s)
Lionbridge TW, GlobalSight, whatever the client prefers?
Will there be a set of standard-based, highly interoperable tools (a “CAT Blu-ray”)?
Will cloud/SaaS with a browser interface be the winning paradigm?
Cloud resistance: lack of rich workbench feature set & safe integration of local language resources, limited customization

CAT tool functionality

CAT feature tuning
Twist & turn until you get everyone satisfied?
LSP
PM
Translator
Mission impossible.

CAT feature tuning
A different angle:
Clients & corporate translation departments

CAT feature tuning
Who has the most power to drive changes?
Smaller translation buyers are usually not interested in what is “under the hood”
Large LSPs & corporate buyers/users have strong leverage on tools & functionality
Some smaller but proactive clients turn to easy-to-use, low-footprint XLIFF/TMX-based CAT tools
Translator/PM contribution extremely useful for improving productivity, but needs to be pulled by developers (while high-level input may result in fancy functionality that is not so much useful)

Too much on our plate...
MLV clients
Core tools
“Playful”
clients

Feature set strongly influenced by...
Translators: Déjà Vu, Wordfast, memoQ
Large LSPs & corporate buyers:SDL Trados, STAR Transit
LSP PM & workflow requirements:XTM, memoQ 4.x, SDL Trados Studio 2009

TMS integration
CSA: memoQ & XTM leading 2nd generation TM products with good TMS integration
Plunet, XTRF, Beetext Flow MMX prove that integration works
TMS without business integration (mainly file/project packaging and workflow) failed to win hearts & minds

What is the winning combination?
Large LSP paired with CAT tool:
SDL + Trados
Lionbridge + Translation Workspace
Welocalize + GlobalSight
STAR + Transit
CAT tool paired with TMS:
XTM + XTRF
memoQ + Plunet/XTRF/LTC Worx
All 3 elementscombined: SDL Trados + Plunet

Architecture

Architecture: Buyers
Many clients rely on language vendors for CAT technology; whether it is hosted by the LSP or a SaaS provider probably makes no big difference
A web-based architecture suits well any functionality exposed to the end-customer (e.g. customer portal, queries & issue tracking, terminology input/review)
Smaller buyers with in-house translation departments usually have SDL Trados but cloud/SaaS may be attractive as a low-cost, small-footprint option especially at the entry level

Architecture: LSPs
Cloud/SaaS may be a big step due to fear of uncertainty:
No track record yet with service levels and risk of disruptions
Fear to hand over valuable language assets, TMs, termbases
Server-client hosted by LSP:
No 24x7 hosting experience, yet freelancers work during late hours and on week-ends
Server farm hosting a must unless FTO available
Already have servers for project mgmt sw, FTP, e-mail
Main selling point for Cloud/SaaS:
Want to keep lean organization (LSPs with no major infrastructure)
Main selling points for server-client:
Online & collaborative workflows for fast turnaround & efficiency
Keeping control over technology & linguistic resources, more customization & integration options, avoid vendor lock-in

Architecture: Translators
Resistance from power CAT user translators against any new tool:
Already invested heavily in productivity-increasing shortcuts & macros
Extensive collection of valuable language assets, TMs, termbases
Any new pricing scheme perceived as implicit fee reduction
Learning curve; temptation to tweak & use Trados or other CAT favourite
Server-client:
Fear of lags, downtime & loss of productivity
Fail-over to local TM possible, but problems with floating licenses
Need to use own industry-specific termbases/TMs, initial hassle of normalization for exporting + import
Reactions from outright refusal to praising immediate productivity gains
Cloud/SaaS:
Subscription & tenancy in multiple systems to accommodate diverse customers (Lionbridge TW, XTM Cloud, SDL Trados Starter Edition): not so costly but not efficient either; community approach attractive
Intellectual property concerns with uploading “own” local termbases, TMs

Managing change

Scared of sacred cows?
Some of the best, most seasoned translators may go on strike
Do not be scared; provide as much support for the new CAT tool to your translators as possible
Faster is less painful; never let fear dictate your technology choices
However, a more gradual transition could be in your best interest, too

Managing the change with SDL Trados Studio 2009
Good, hassle-free project packaging with very efficient merge & split
Plain offline workflow with online TMs, terminology and MT providers
Some minor problems compared to T2007
Stricter HTML parsing rejects some files
INI file importing not always smooth
Inline tag import from T2007 TMX or TTX still leaves room for improvement

Managing the change with SDL Trados Studio 2009
Good DTP filters (FrameMaker, InDesign)
No new collaboration features (online projects, chat/forum): good or bad news?
Multilevel vendor structure not geared at online projects & collaboration
Problems with mixed environments:
Translators on T2007 : Preferred TTX workflow cumbersome, hope TTX It! helps
MS Word workflow discouraged, bilingual Word files obsolete
Translate SDLXLIFF in another tool? Not worth it

Managing the change with memoQ
Good, hassle-free project packaging; some limitations with views still to be eliminated
Excellent workflow options, online and offline projects, mix of server and local resources, online projects with desktop docs
Smooth migration from T2007
TMX import excellent, including inline tags
Easy termbase editing, base form support
Great XML filter (can populate tags)

Managing the change with memoQ
DTP filters need improvement and support latest versions mainly
Excellent collaboration features (online projects, chat/forum/live comments)
Problems with mixed environments:
Trados bilingual file interchange supported but import often does not work – WIP
TM metadata juggling
Different word counts & fuzzy match values

Offline, online, collaborative, cascade

Workflow options
Offline workflow, offline TM
Good packaging & workflow support in 2nd gen CAT tools
Suitable for 1 translator per language
No direct access required to linguists at the vendor LSP, which some LSPs are reluctant to grant
Linguists & PMs are accustomed to it
Online forum can still give some “collaboration feel”
Lack of progress visibility
Offline workflow, online TM
More translators/language: benefits of online leveraging
OK for 1 language but handoff/delivery too complex for many languages and linguists

Workflow options
Online workflow (sequential), online TM
Neatly manageable
Productivity gains, inter-language collaboration
Needs translator buy-in and stable infrastructure
Online workflow (cascade), online TM
Excellent for rush projects
Terminology problems captured & fixed almost immediately, preventing propagation and saving editing/ review time + effort
In projects spanning several domains, subject area experts can be easily involved (e.g. IT + finance)
Real-time collaboration, real benefits

Instant TM matches
Online forumdiscussions
Segment-levelcomments
Moderated terminology

Some points to note
2nd generation CAT tools require more thinking on the PM’s part and more careful preparation
Benefits include smoother execution and faster overall turnaround time
Aim at better quality in the translation phase; smart preparation, collaboration, client Q+A and real-time QA reduce errors and correction time
Translators LOVE segment-level comments while completely IGNORE any instructions & other guidance

Strategic choices

2nd generation benefits
Rich translation workbench functionality in a more integrated environment
Free to mix multiple online & offline MTs, termbases, MT/terminology providers and searchable resource collections
Workflow efficiencies on the LSP/PM side
Open standards support (TMX, TBX, SRX, XLIFF) – hopefully not just lip service
Online collaboration & new workflows

Workflow transition
Ready to jump-start with a turnkey SaaS/cloud solution?
Want a more gradual transition by freely choosing & mixing offline/online workflows?
Not interested in online projects and collaboration?
Personal opinion: Choose the solution that keeps the most options open for you

Recommendations
Analyze all possible requirements & file formats before making a decision
Software and content localization requires
Direct DTD/filter manipulation for XML, CMS formats and any resources with inline tags, placeholders, entities etc.
String/resource ID context for ICE
Smart length checking as part of QA
Parsing non-translatables like %s, {0}, that are not <tags>; regexp parsing may be useful
Comments visible during translation, tag context visibility
DTP: Test filters for all file formats, including any older versions still used by clients

Architecture & tool choice
Online collaboration is not just a buzzword – it is a real life-saver for huge volumes with short deadlines
Cloud and SaaS relieve you from hosting technology but may seem restrictive to LSPs accustomed to in-premise technology
Fallback to offline packages safer than online only
However, technology convergence may happen at the online level as cloud/SaaS appeals to end-customers

There is no such animal...
Smart, simple, intuitive, no deployment
Comprehensive, customisable, adaptable
Backwards compatible and future-proof
But I know the closest thing... 

Thank You!
gabor.farago@espell.com

TM-Europe 2010_Mixing online+offline projects

by Gabor Farago

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

TM-Europe 2010_Mixing online+offline projects Presentation Transcript