One of the readers of my previous blog on Java Localization mentioned that the apostrophe (a “single quote” character) is also a very special character in a Java string and just today I got a support case dealing with exactly this issue. The question of our customer is why a single apostrophe that is entered into a string translation in SDL Passolo is written to the target Java property file as two apostrophes. Let me try to explain.

One of the technical aspects of .NET which can impact localization is the concept of signed assemblies. In this blog I will discuss with you what signing of assemblies is about and how to deal with them in the context of software localization.

What do I mean by "freestyle" document?  This is best described with pictures, but to get you started, how many times have you been unable to manage numbering properly in Studio because the autotranslation puts numbers in your target segment that are not what you want at all?  Well this is what I'm talking about.

I think almost every day I see a problem resolved on a user forum somewhere by understanding what the difference is between Global or Project settings in SDL Trados Studio... otherwise referred to as Tools - Options or Project - Project Settings.  So here's my shot at explaining the difference.

We recently had a Java support case which made us review the behavior of the SDL Passolo parser for Java property files . Our customer observed that the same sentence – which occurs in two different source files – was being written differently to the target files. We could reproduce the behavior and the two variants look like this in the target files while the source files both contained the first variant:

A string “containing” double quotes.
A string \”containing\” double quotes.

These two variants are in fact equal representations and are handled identically by the Java framework. But the customer was concerned because of the different behavior of Passolo for each source file. So we had to investigate a little further and here are our findings.

Last week we hosted the SDL Localization Day, where we looked at the issues of delivering software on a global scale. It was made up of six sessions including, as is so often missed with these events, a customer case study from Roche Diagnostics.

For the format of the day, we ran a series of webinars “nose to tail”, meaning that you could drop in and out as needed. It seemed that most people stayed for all sessions, but as everything was virtual, we didn’t really know if you’d stepped away from your desk for comfort or tea breaks!

All users of SDL Trados Studio 2009 should recognise this toolbar:

This provides the ability to filter the view you are translating in as follows:

• Segments with comments
• Duplicate segments
• Fuzzy matches
• New translated content
• 100% pretranslated content
• All content
• All segments
• Unconfirmed segments
• Segments containing user defined strings in the source or target
• The ability to use regular expressions to filter more precisely

This subject probably needs no introduction because everyone knows how to use Microsoft Word and has seen or used track changes at some point.  So this article is going to focus on how we use it in Studio 2011 and on how we have made this compatible with Microsoft Word to enhance the review process for both translator reviewer and subject matter expert in addition to being able to use this to provide consistent audit trail capability for any filetype.

Translate to what?

Yes, I have to admit I am a relative latecomer to Trados tools and I have had to learn more about Translators Workbench after getting familiar with Studio, rather than the other way around.  Sometimes I think this gives me an advantage over many experienced users because I probably don't know what I'm missing..!

Certainly this is the ideal situation for every software vendor who would like their tool to be the only one their users need... one desktop and only one tool needed..!  A couple of years ago I ran a survey to look at the different applications that a translator used and the results, whilst not entirely surprising, showed that the average translator had two different translation tools installed; and a multitude of applications you wouldn't believe..!  I imagine some of you will know quite a few who have three or even four translation tools installed, but wouldn't it be better if you only needed one?