Lack of interoperability costs the translation industry a fortune according to report on a TAUS/LISA survey

This discussion belongs to Translation news » "Lack of interoperability costs the translation industry a fortune according to report on a TAUS/LISA survey".
You can see the translation news page and participate in this discussion from there.


Soonthon LUPKITARO(Ph.D.)  Identity Verified
Thailand
Local time: 23:01
Member (2004)
English to Thai
+ ...
No barrier of entry Mar 9, 2011

During economic depression days in 2009, I met with many bad quality translators and agencies [new entries to our business] due to free Internet access. My energy was much spent to amend bad translated terms and use of unqualified software and unqualified agency staffs. If language business is a licensed business, interoperability costs can be saved largely.

Soonthon Lupkitaro


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Tomás Cano Binder, BA, CT  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 17:01
Member (2005)
English to Spanish
+ ...
???? Mar 9, 2011

Clearly this news item has a goal: to promote TAUS. A clear case of "cui prodest" if you ask me.

So "Thirdly, they say, the industry is missing an organizing body or umbrella organization capable of leading the effort and monitoring the compliance."??? What is LISA doing then? Do they plan to replace LISA with TAUS or something?

Currently we already have TMX and XLIFF, which most vendors accept in some way or the other, so interoperability is not costing anybody a fortune. It is costing them the time required for one person to import a TMX file into a memory, i.e. 5 minutes.

It is interesting to see that SDL, one of TAUS' global members.... does NOT use a standard format in their newest CAT tool. Instead of using XLIFF, they created.... SDLXLIFF! If there is lack of interoperability in our industry, they can take part of the blame.


Direct link Reply with quote
 
Laurent KRAULAND  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 17:01
French to German
+ ...
TAUS and self-promotion Mar 9, 2011

Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:

Clearly this news item has a goal: to promote TAUS. A clear case of "cui prodest" if you ask me.

So "Thirdly, they say, the industry is missing an organizing body or umbrella organization capable of leading the effort and monitoring the compliance."??? What is LISA doing then? Do they plan to replace LISA with TAUS or something?

Currently we already have TMX and XLIFF, which most vendors accept in some way or the other, so interoperability is not costing anybody a fortune. It is costing them the time required for one person to import a TMX file into a memory, i.e. 5 minutes.

It is interesting to see that SDL, one of TAUS' global members.... does NOT use a standard format in their newest CAT tool. Instead of using XLIFF, they created.... SDLXLIFF! If there is lack of interoperability in our industry, they can take part of the blame.



As per LISA, Tomás, please see this http://tinyurl.com/68knhph - sad news.

I concur about the fact that TAUS has been doing a lot of self-promotion and profiling since its inception, often with corpospeak of the worst colour and spurious arguments. However, only industry insiders will know to which point the overall communication of TAUS lacks both objectivity and insight. Big corporations will swallow such articles hook, line and sinker.

And yes, I find it somewhat contradictory that an association which counts the probably first-in-class worldwide creator of proprietary CAT tool formats among its members has the nerve to speak about costs generated by "lack of interoperability".

PS: I don't even dare to mention that the objective of some global players here, there and elsewhere still is to reduce human input to MT post-editing in the best hypothesis.

[Edited at 2011-03-09 09:41 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Anton Konashenok  Identity Verified
Czech Republic
Local time: 17:01
English to Russian
+ ...
Not seeing the forest for the trees Mar 9, 2011

It's hard to argue that the lack of interoperability is bad. For example, it would certainly be wonderful to have some sort of an interchange format supported by all leading vendors of CAT software. Case in point: my biggest client is sending me files produced in a CAT tool that's very crude and full of counterintuitive features despite having the second biggest market share (those in the know would easily guess the tool). Had there been a commonly supported data format, I would have been able to import them into my tool of choice, the one with the biggest market share and the best user interface of all CAT tools, though a bit buggy (wink wink).

Thus, we definitely need a common standard, and this probably does warrant the existence of an industry body that would develop such a standard and keep it up to date. Unfortunately, the associations in question are full of managerial types rattling the words like "ROI", "budget", "metrics", "leveraging", etc., but having a fairly vague idea of what the translation profession is about. As a result, we get the current situation, when the rates paid for software localization are so ridiculously low that no serious translator would accept them, and the localized versions of software by such giants as Adobe and Autodesk become a laughing stock among end users in respective countries. THIS is what is costing the industry millions in lost sales. You have to keep your end users satisfied if you want them to buy your software instead of pirating it!

[Edited at 2011-03-09 15:10 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
Laurent KRAULAND  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 17:01
French to German
+ ...
Trouble is... Mar 9, 2011

Anton Konashenok wrote:

It's hard to argue that the lack of interoperability is bad. For example, it would certainly be wonderful to have some sort of an interchange format supported by all leading vendors of CAT software. Case in point: my biggest client is sending me files produced in a CAT tool that's very crude and full of counterintuitive features despite having the second biggest market share (those in the know would easily guess the tool). Had there been a commonly supported data format, I would have been able to import them into my tool of choice, the one with the biggest market share and the best user interface of all CAT tools, though a bit buggy (wink wink).
(.../...)


Trouble is that there is such a format - it is called XLIFF and has been around for some years now. Most software publishers ignore it on purpose or derive their own flavour from it.


Direct link Reply with quote
 


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

Moderator(s) of this forum
Jared Tabor[Call to this topic]

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

Lack of interoperability costs the translation industry a fortune according to report on a TAUS/LISA survey

Advanced search







SDL Trados Studio 2017 for €415/$495 with free eLearning
Get the cheapest prices for SDL Trados Studio 2017 on ProZ.com

Join this translator’s group buy brought to you by ProZ.com and buy SDL Trados Studio 2017 Freelance for only €415 / $495 / £325 / ¥60,000 For this month only – receive SDL Trados Studio 2017 - Getting Started eLearning for FREE.

More info »
BaccS – Business Accounting Software
Modern desktop project management for freelance translators

BaccS makes it easy for translators to manage their projects, schedule tasks, create invoices, and view highly customizable reports. User-friendly, ProZ.com integration, community-driven development – a few reasons BaccS is trusted by translators!

More info »



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