Pages in topic:   [1 2] >
Using Studio 2011 instead of WordFast
Thread poster: Hellmut Kohlsdorf

Hellmut Kohlsdorf  Identity Verified
Local time: 17:21
German to Spanish
+ ...
Sep 15, 2011

Hi friends

I do have a large customer that requires me to work with Wordfast Pro, always in its latest incarnation. From their perspective it makes sense!

I always get sad when I see how inefficient is Wordfast Pro 2.4.2 compared to Studio 2009 and so in the future with 2011.

My wish:

Take the TM and TMXL file delivered for translation from the agency and have a workflow taht can process it and delivers the expected translated tmxl file and ideally the TM updated.

Somebody has a suggestion?

Regards Hellmut


 

Alex Lago  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 17:21
Member (2009)
English to Spanish
+ ...
Studio vs. Wf Sep 15, 2011

hellmut1956 wrote:

I always get sad when I see how inefficient is Wordfast Pro 2.4.2 compared to Studio 2009 and so in the future with 2011.



I'd be interested if you could delve into this a bit more, I only have experience with WF and would like to hear your thoughts on why Studio is more efficient.


 

Natalie  Identity Verified
Poland
Local time: 17:21
Member (2002)
English to Russian
+ ...

Moderator of this forum
This is my wish as well... Sep 15, 2011

hellmut1956 wrote:

Take the TM and TMXL file delivered for translation from the agency and have a workflow taht can process it and delivers the expected translated tmxl file and ideally the TM updated.


I would also prefer working in Studio and delivering TXML files... This would be really great. TMs are not a problem at all, however the TXML format is incompatible with Studioicon_frown.gif


 

Hellmut Kohlsdorf  Identity Verified
Local time: 17:21
German to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Give me sometime to respond properly Sep 15, 2011

Hi Alex

Give me some time, I will try to respond properly, as I believe this is of general interest. As I do have a service contract with SDL I wil open a case and publish the feedback.

As to TMs, 90+% are local, but sometimes also remote. If you can tell about how you do it it might be very valuable. We should try to define workflows for such kind of things for general use. May be a suggestion for Studio 2013?



[Bearbeitet am 2011-09-15 17:11 GMT]


 

Grzegorz Gryc  Identity Verified
Local time: 17:21
French to Polish
+ ...
Search the archives... Sep 15, 2011

Natalie wrote:

hellmut1956 wrote:

Take the TM and TMXL file delivered for translation from the agency and have a workflow taht can process it and delivers the expected translated tmxl file and ideally the TM updated.


I would also prefer working in Studio and delivering TXML files... This would be really great. TMs are not a problem at all, however the TXML format is incompatible with Studioicon_frown.gif


This is really simple in the most primitive scenario.

I pointed it in:
http://www.proz.com/forum/sdl_trados_support/163400-how_to_open_wordfast_txml_with_trados_studio.html
and Paul did the rest.

Cheers
GG


 

Grzegorz Gryc  Identity Verified
Local time: 17:21
French to Polish
+ ...
Remote TMs Sep 15, 2011

hellmut1956 wrote:

As to TMs, 90+% are local, but sometimes also remote.


If you have remote TMs, you have a problem.

Cheers
GG


 

Selcuk Akyuz  Identity Verified
Turkey
Local time: 18:21
Member (2006)
English to Turkish
+ ...
memoQ Sep 15, 2011

AFAIR, a real TXML filter was in the development list of memoQ. Current filters used by memoQ, DVX and Studio users do not work with pretranslated files.

I think if you ask SDL for a TXML filter they will develop one (otherwise their competitor, memoQ will do).


 

Heinrich Pesch  Identity Verified
Finland
Local time: 18:21
Member (2003)
Finnish to German
+ ...
Personal problem? Sep 15, 2011

What are the issues with WFP? I usually translate rather in WFP than in other software. When we look at the mass of complains about Studio here in the forum, I don't believe WFP generates as many problems as Studio.
Using WFP makes sense for agencies, because the developer team reacts eagerly to suggestions and bug-reports.


 

Natalie  Identity Verified
Poland
Local time: 17:21
Member (2002)
English to Russian
+ ...

Moderator of this forum
Wow, thanks for the link, Gregorz! Sep 15, 2011

I'll try!

Heinrich Pesch wrote:
Personal problems?
What are the issues with WFP?


Absolutely no issues with WF, as well as absolutely no issues with Studio. Just a matter of preference.


 

Grzegorz Gryc  Identity Verified
Local time: 17:21
French to Polish
+ ...
Terminology in WF Pro... Sep 15, 2011

Heinrich Pesch wrote:

What are the issues with WFP?

Extremely stupid terminology handling.
Files saved in the user profile, no termbase sharing, no multilingual termbases, no serious fuzzy terminology recognition etc.
If you compare it to WFC, it's a big step back.

When we look at the mass of complains about Studio here in the forum, I don't believe WFP generates as many problems as Studio.

I'm sure WFP has better support than any Trados version but the terminology handling approach simply kills me.

BTW.
I don't work in Trados mainly 'cause Multiterm never worked in a decent way during the last 10 years.

Cheers
GG


 

Gyula Erdész
Hungary
Local time: 17:21
Member (2005)
English to Hungarian
+ ...
WFP - no terminology window Sep 16, 2011

Grzegorz Gryc wrote:

Extremely stupid terminology handling.



I agree with you, Gregorz.

No separate terminology window in a CAT tool in 2011?
You need to click at least 3-4 times to select and paste the right term from the termbase into the target segment. This is nonsense.

Regards,

Gyula


 

Heinrich Pesch  Identity Verified
Finland
Local time: 18:21
Member (2003)
Finnish to German
+ ...
Terminology works fine for me Sep 16, 2011

Gyula Erdész wrote:

Grzegorz Gryc wrote:

Extremely stupid terminology handling.



I agree with you, Gregorz.

No separate terminology window in a CAT tool in 2011?
You need to click at least 3-4 times to select and paste the right term from the termbase into the target segment. This is nonsense.

Regards,

Gyula



If I remember right, you highlight the term using Alt+right/left, then Cntrl+Alt+Down brings the translation to the cursor position. As in WFC. No mouse action required.
I prefer simple glossary files to multilingual termbase files.


 

xxxkalap
Use autopropagation Sep 16, 2011

Gyula Erdész wrote:

Grzegorz Gryc wrote:

Extremely stupid terminology handling.



I agree with you, Gregorz.

No separate terminology window in a CAT tool in 2011?
You need to click at least 3-4 times to select and paste the right term from the termbase into the target segment. This is nonsense.

Regards,

Gyula



Preferences > Terminology > Copy only target glossary terms
Do not tick "Disable fuzzy terminology" (probably, you'll have to try this out)

And in Select terminology, tick the right glossaries (as much as you want). Some terminology management is necessary here (do not mix up client specific terminology and general terminology and do not add all new terminology to all terminology lists).


 

Gyula Erdész
Hungary
Local time: 17:21
Member (2005)
English to Hungarian
+ ...
time is money Sep 16, 2011

Heinrich Pesch wrote:

If I remember right, you highlight the term using Alt+right/left, then Cntrl+Alt+Down brings the translation to the cursor position. As in WFC. No mouse action required.
I prefer simple glossary files to multilingual termbase files.


Dear Heinrich,

Please compare the following two methods in view of ergonomics and efficiency.

Wordfast Pro:

When you open the segment, you do not get an overview with all of the term hits within the segment. If you want to see e.g. the seventh term hit in the row, you need to press Alt+right/left arrow seven times. Seven keystrokes, jut to see the target term and decide, if it can be inserted in the segment.

Other CAT tools with terminology window (without naming any of them):

As you open the segment, you clearly see all of the term hits (with their target terms) in a separate window. No further key combinations needed, you are right at the point of decision.




[Módosítva: 2011-09-16 12:57 GMT]


 

Maurice Devroye
United States
Local time: 11:21
English to French
Back to square one Oct 25, 2011

Hi,

I have read other threads and I applied Paul Filkin's method to create a TXML file type in Studio. The results I came up with are less than satisfactorily.

To answer Hellmut's original wish: have you come across an efficient TXML file type (or filter) in order to open a Wordfast document in Studio?

Alternatively: is Studio 2011 going to offer a solution?

Thanks,
MD


 
Pages in topic:   [1 2] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Using Studio 2011 instead of WordFast

Advanced search







PerfectIt consistency checker
Faster Checking, Greater Accuracy

PerfectIt helps deliver error-free documents. It improves consistency, ensures quality and helps to enforce style guides. It’s a powerful tool for pro users, and comes with the assurance of a 30-day money back guarantee.

More info »
Protemos translation business management system
Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!

The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.

More info »



Forums
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search