Getting your Documentation Ready for Localization
Have you had to prepare your documentation for localization yet? My experience is that in almost all companies, writers have far too many other oppressive concerns gnawing at them to think about writing for localization.
A few days ago an industry colleague sent me a message asking, "Do you have experience making recommendations for how documentation can be authored for localization? I am looking to make our doc process more efficient to reduce costs."
I replied that, given his stature and tenure in the industry, there was not likely anything I could suggest that he hadn't already considered. Nevertheless, I sent him a list of ideas, in increasing order of difficulty:
If you liked this post, have a look at Getting Writers to Care about Localized Documents.
A few days ago an industry colleague sent me a message asking, "Do you have experience making recommendations for how documentation can be authored for localization? I am looking to make our doc process more efficient to reduce costs."
I replied that, given his stature and tenure in the industry, there was not likely anything I could suggest that he hadn't already considered. Nevertheless, I sent him a list of ideas, in increasing order of difficulty:
- Make sure all the writers' computers are plugged in. (A bit of ironic humor I could not resist.)
- Is it easy to get from the authoring tool(s) into TM, and back out into publishable format? This is my current headache with an API reference manual we localize for one client, because moving from source language to the translator tools and back to target format is a colossal headache. If you have similar problems, devote some cycles at the format-layer, even if it means writing an interface between your content management system and the translation tool.
- There are "authoring memory" tools that can suggest and re-use already-xlated source text, so that writers don't say nearly the same thing multiple times and incur unnecessary TM penalties. Sajan has one, and SDLX contains one as well. I've never used either one, but I can imagine that success with the tools would require somebody with the documentation-familiarity of a technical writer and the global consciousness of a localization manager. Like you.
- I've presented on localization to a variety of audiences, and have consistently found tech writers to be the most interested in it, vastly more so than developers. When you show writers how the TM tools work, tell them how they can save money and re-use content, and let them know that you care about the impact of their work on international products, they will smell the coffee and engage. This takes a bit of evangelism, but it's worth it if the writers change their own practices.
- Convert everything to XML. Although Renato and Don of Common Sense Advisory joke that that will fix any L10n problem, it's nonetheless a good, long-term direction in which to move. It's easier to re-use text, and easier to mark text that should/should not be translated. That will save you money.
- Start a program of controlled language authoring (dumbing down the sentences, always writing in a structure that machine translation will recognize, etc.). I guess that GM and Caterpillar are poster children for this kind of thing, but it puts the writers (and you, in the bargain) through the change of life, which is why I mention it last.
If you liked this post, have a look at Getting Writers to Care about Localized Documents.
Labels: documentation internationalization, documentation localization, machine translation, technical writers, writing for localization
9 Comments:
This is not a direct answer to your questions, more an addition. We just ordered and received a brand-new book which would serve as a great reference for someone trying to implement Global English with writers and other departments: "The Global English Style Guide" by John Kohl. Also, in terms of connecting content mangagement with translation tools, Clay Tablet Technologies have a promising solution for this, but unfortunately I do not have any first-hand experience using it.
By Uta Moncur, at 08:12
Uta:
Thanks for mentioning the Kohl book. Now all you need to do is get the writers to read it (see my last bullet).
John
By John White, Localization Guy, at 09:01
An excellent tool that I would recommend to any Tech Pubs department in Acrolinx's Acrocheck. Among its features, it has a pass/fail evaluation of the source text for translation purposes. Check it out at http://www.acrolinx.com/
By Renato Beninatto, at 09:31
John, have you come across any CMS/GMS tools that interact well both with authoring and localization processes/vendors?
By Uta Moncur, at 09:30
I'll try connecting you to another subscriber who may have more information.
By John White, Localization Guy, at 09:36
Uta:
Here's an answer from a fellow subscriber:
"There are tons out there, and it depends on their authoring environment. For us, we use the following systems, which support authoring and localization well (for authoring in XML/DITA):
CMS: Trisoft
GMS: SDL TMS
Authoring: XMetal and SDL Author Assist
If they want to go the cheap route, Lionbridge offers GMS services free to their clients. Some other large vendors are looking to do the same. Here are a few leads, but if they are really serious about figuring out what is best for them given their authoring environment, they should be prepared to either do a lot of research, or pay someone like Common Sense Advisory to do it for them.
- Idiom’s Worldserver (now SDL)
- Lionbridge’s Freeway (LogoPort)
- Translations.com’s GlobalLink
- Transware’s Ambassador (now WeLocalize)"
By John White, Localization Guy, at 17:39
Thank you, John! Really appreciate it. I am amazed that most of these are now tied into LSPs. Makes it hard to recommend something to a client when you're a smaller LSP yourself. I will definitely look into each one of the suggestions though.
By Uta, at 08:38
As for Kohl's book, it is one of more comprehensive books on the topic. When I heard that John was writing it, I decided not to continue with one of my long-term projects of doing the same. So I reviewed his instead.
Having it in electronic format would make it more useful for transitional learning of the topic, without taking a course on it.
By jeff, at 15:25
Uta,
It is important to distinguish between authoring technologies, CMS and GMS/TMS.
* Some GMS's have plug-ins/adaptors for CMS's
* Some CMS's and/or GMS's can support some authoring technologies
* Clay Tablet is a middleware to help link between a CMS and a GMS without have to only look at existing links between CMS and GMS due to same company, or partnerships
A couple of examples:
Translations.com has GlobalLink GMS that has info on website
about CMS adaptors for Documentum,
Fatwire, TeamSite, and Rhythmyx, and marketing brochures distributed on conferences on these and also Oracle (formerly Stellant CMS).
Translations.com also has the ABREVE source language optimization methodology and tool.
SDL has the Idiom WorldServer GMS and its own GIM version. WorldServer had established partnerships with many CMS vendors prior to being acquired by SDL. SDL had also acquired CMS vendor Tridion just before Idiom.
SDL has authoring technology called SDL AuthorAssistant.
As mentioned in the thread above, it takes a lot of research and time to gather and filter the info provided in different formats from the different vendors, to see what they support. Sometimes it's better to have someone do it for you who has experience in analyzing such tools and their technology co-dependencies.
Hope that helps.
Jeff Allen
By jeff, at 15:44
Post a Comment
<< Home