Localization Train slowing

We're seeing the localization juggernaut lose some steam.

In the early years, this client localized its flagship software package for developers in China, Japan and Korea (CJK), then added Brazil. It took small, reference applications into as many as 10 languages (including Hebrew and Thai) as those markets showed promise. The budget was pretty fat, the localized products were freshened frequently, and the developers were happy to have software and doc in their own language.

I suppose it was to be expected that this would peter out with time, because markets change, business cases wax and wane, and some regions never return the investment.

The new stressor on localization was less easy to anticipate: bulk. Each generation of improvements to the product brings several hundred more pages of documentation. All of this new documentation is, of course, "free" in English, but somebody has to pull out a checkbook to deal with it in other languages, and that checkbook comes out more slowly and with more misgivings these days.

Engineering and Product Management furrow their brow nowadays when I walk in with cost estimates. I've adapted to this change in attitude with a few techniques:

1. The Technical Reference is the fattest target and the source of most of the expansion. It lives in a compiled help file (CHM) that is no longer written by Tech Pubs, but generated by Perl scripts from header files written by the engineers. Our modus localizandi has been to hand off the finished help project, now comprising 3700 HTML files, and have the HTML translated. In an effort to lower cost, I'm attempting a proof-of-concept to localize the header files themselves, then tune the scripts to convert them into localized HTML. This should lower our localization engineering costs considerably.
2. I agitate for interim localization updates, peeling off documentation deltas every few weeks and handing them off for translation, even if there are no plans to release them yet. This reduces the sticker shock and time-to-market delay that comes of getting an estimate on a release only when necessary, which may be a 10- to 18-month interval. Product Management and Engineering, who only think about localization when it's absolutely unavoidable, find the tsunami of untranslated text depressing.
3. Although it's not a very clean way of doing things, I screen from the localization handoff those items that I know have little to be translated. Sometimes I go to the level of resource files, but more often I take documents to which only a few minor changes have been made from one En version to the next, hand off changed text, then place the translations myself. This is not for the faint of heart, nor for those who don't really know the languages involved, but it can save some money.
   
4. I try to keep global plates spinning, in the hope that more people will consider the global dimension of what we do, and the fact that localization is the necessary step for making your product acceptable to people whose use of your product will make you money, if you make it easy for them.
   
5. I never impart bad news on Friday.
   

Improved Docs through Localization

I spent some time on the phone with new clients last week, going through a user guide they plan to have localized. Discussing the usual localization questions (i.e., the ones I figured the translators would ask sooner or later), we began to edge towards the initially depressing realm of Changing Documentation to Suit Localization.

"Don't misunderstand," I repeated intoned, "I'm not trying to get you to re-write an already published book just to make localization easier. We're just bringing up small issues in how you can write future books a bit more generically so that you can take exactly what you've published in English and hand it off for localization without customizing it first."

Still, I thought I detected a collective, resigned sigh from them. I've learned by now that it translates to "Writing for translation is really going to be a pain, isn't it?"

They then asked for suggestions about optimizing future documents for localization purposes, in the form of guidelines or style guides. This is good thinking, and I told them so. It amounts to documentation internationalization.

I've read plenty of articles on how to do this (authors include Kit Brown of Comgenesis and Nancy Combe), but I usually find them superficial (leave white space, use numbered callouts, be sure to do the software first...), because the solution doesn't lie in documents, but rather in each organization and in the way that Engineering, Product Management, Tech Pubs and the overseas partners work together.

I told them that they could read up on this for a month, or we could all just go through the process of localizing an already written manual and make our own guidelines. The former won't do any harm, but I think they'll find that the latter will result in more - and more-specific - pointers that will apply to future books.

The important thing is to arrive at gradual changes that the company will tolerate in the next 3/6/12 months, so that their books become more global without the localization-tail wagging the dog.