Comparison of WordFast Classic and Pro
Thread poster: Oliver Walter

Oliver Walter  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 17:20
Member (2005)
German to English
+ ...
May 31, 2010

Since I have not actually used WF Pro I didn't realise what NMR mentioned earlier today, that WFC (WordFast Classic) is required if you want to generate a bilingual Word file. I had assumed that WFPro can do anything that WFC can do, but would work on a range of computers with Java, not necessarily Windows.

To me, an important compatibility between WordFast and Trados is that they can "clean up" each other's bilingual files. this now appears to be true for WFC but not WFPro (unless Trados can clean up WordFast's TXML files and, to judge from recent Proz threads, it can't).

A feature of WFC that is sometimes important to me but, I now think, might not be possible with WFPro is this: When I use WFC to translate a Word file, I apply text formatting to reproduce source-text formatting in the corresponding parts of the target text (e.g. bold, underline, italic).

So, although the Wordfast home page says that Wordfast Professional "opens a much wider variety of formats than Wordfast Classic", it now seems to me that this is deliberately avoiding saying that WFPro can do anything else with those formats apart from "opening" them.
The same page, talking about WordFast Classic then says "Wordfast Classic maintains compatibility with Trados and most CAT tools" which looks to me like a positive sales-talk way of saying "Wordfast Professional does not maintain much compatibility with Trados and most CAT tools. "

I therefore have two questions from this:
  1. Where (if one exists) is there already available a list that compares the features and compatibilities of WFC and WFPro?
  2. (to the WordFast people) Assuming the incompatiblities are what I suspect, is that a necessary consequence of the initial design aims of WFPro and therefore a major reason why it was decided that the single licence fee would need to cover licences to use both WFC and WFPro?

Oliver


 

NMR (X)
France
Local time: 18:20
French to Dutch
+ ...
Some remarks May 31, 2010

Oliver Walter wrote:

Since I have not actually used WF Pro I didn't realise what NMR mentioned earlier today, that WFC (WordFast Classic) is required if you want to generate a bilingual Word file. I had assumed that WFPro can do anything that WFC can do, but would work on a range of computers with Java, not necessarily Windows.


WF Pro and WF Classic cannot clean up each other's bilingual files, but the TM is the same, it is in .txt and entirely compatible.

To me, an important compatibility between WordFast and Trados is that they can "clean up" each other's bilingual files. this now appears to be true for WFC but not WFPro (unless Trados can clean up WordFast's TXML files and, to judge from recent Proz threads, it can't).


The only solution for the moment is to use WF Classic if you want to send a Trados-compatible bilingual file to your client.

A feature of WFC that is sometimes important to me but, I now think, might not be possible with WFPro is this: When I use WFC to translate a Word file, I apply text formatting to reproduce source-text formatting in the corresponding parts of the target text (e.g. bold, underline, italic).


You cannot "add" formatting in the .tmxl file, you'll have to do this in the cleaned version.

So, although the Wordfast home page says that Wordfast Professional "opens a much wider variety of formats than Wordfast Classic", it now seems to me that this is deliberately avoiding saying that WFPro can do anything else with those formats apart from "opening" them.


This isn't true: WF opens and saves the file in the original format, and you keep the .tmxl file for further reference or corrections. For Powerpoint and Excel, this is working much better than in WF Classic, and you can even use more exotic formats. If you don't own the original software, there is a preview you can print out and proofread.


The same page, talking about WordFast Classic then says "Wordfast Classic maintains compatibility with Trados and most CAT tools" which looks to me like a positive sales-talk way of saying "Wordfast Professional does not maintain much compatibility with Trados and most CAT tools. "


Compatibility should now be on the TM-level (.tmx), or you can give a bilingual Word file created by WF Classic to your client, as said above.

I cannot answer for the other questions.


[Modifié le 2010-05-31 09:00 GMT]


 

Krzysztof Kajetanowicz (X)  Identity Verified
Poland
Local time: 18:20
English to Polish
+ ...
that's the problem May 31, 2010

NMR wrote:

Oliver Walter wrote:

Since I have not actually used WF Pro I didn't realise what NMR mentioned earlier today, that WFC (WordFast Classic) is required if you want to generate a bilingual Word file. I had assumed that WFPro can do anything that WFC can do, but would work on a range of computers with Java, not necessarily Windows.


WF Pro and WF Classic cannot clean up each other's bilingual files, but the TM is the same, it is in .txt and entirely compatible.


The problem is, not entirely. The WF Pro TM contains formatting tags and thus "remembers" formatting. If you:

- translate a file using WF Pro in order to create a TM,
- then use the TM to pretranslate a Word file in Classic,

you've still got a bit of work to do. Some matches will be partial.

Not to mention having to have the same segment structure. I often expand or shrink segments, so in order to perform the above exercise I'd have to first do my expansion/shrinkage in the .txml file under Pro and then mimic it in the Word file under Classic.


 

NMR (X)
France
Local time: 18:20
French to Dutch
+ ...
Of course May 31, 2010

Thank you Krzysztof. I wanted to say that you don't have to save the TM in another format, it's all plain text, with and without tags.

 


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


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

Comparison of WordFast Classic and Pro

Advanced search


Translation news related to Wordfast





memoQ translator pro
Kilgray's memoQ is the world's fastest developing integrated localization & translation environment rendering you more productive and efficient.

With our advanced file filters, unlimited language and advanced file support, memoQ translator pro has been designed for translators and reviewers who work on their own, with other translators or in team-based translation projects.

More info »
Déjà Vu X3
Try it, Love it

Find out why Déjà Vu is today the most flexible, customizable and user-friendly tool on the market. See the brand new features in action: *Completely redesigned user interface *Live Preview *Inline spell checking *Inline

More info »



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