| Pages sur ce sujet: < [1 2] | Which CAT to choose? Auteur du fil: Wouter Vanhees
|
|---|
| handling specific file formats | Aug 20, 2010 |
First of all, thanks very much for all your valuable input!
I have a follow-up question, slightly more specific, which I think would be a bit more straightforward to answer.
Regarding the ease-of-use and the "intuitive nature" of several CAT tools, this is indeed something I will check via the trial versions which are available.
However, my follow-up question concerns the ease with which CAT tools handle specific file formats. I'm actually looking for the ... See more First of all, thanks very much for all your valuable input!
I have a follow-up question, slightly more specific, which I think would be a bit more straightforward to answer.
Regarding the ease-of-use and the "intuitive nature" of several CAT tools, this is indeed something I will check via the trial versions which are available.
However, my follow-up question concerns the ease with which CAT tools handle specific file formats. I'm actually looking for the tool that is most efficient in handling these file formats: Office 2000/2003/2007 files, PDF, INX, HTML/XML, TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF. From what I gathered the first few file formats shouldn't pose many problems for most CATs, but TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF are a bit trickier if one isn't to use Studio/Trados.
Can you help me in determining which CAT (other than Studio/Trados) is able to handle those specific TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF files in an efficient manner (without the need of owning Studio/Trados's TagEditor)?
FYI, I'm just a bit reluctant of jumping on the Studio-train after having researched this forum and some other sources. It seems it's pretty buggy, more difficult to get started with than other tools and rather expensive (although another TGB would help with that issue).
Thanks very much! ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Notes about MemoQ | Aug 20, 2010 |
Glocalise wrote:
However, my follow-up question concerns the ease with which CAT tools handle specific file formats. I'm actually looking for the tool that is most efficient in handling these file formats: Office 2000/2003/2007 files, PDF, INX, HTML/XML, TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF. From what I gathered the first few file formats shouldn't pose many problems for most CATs, but TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF are a bit trickier if one isn't to use Studio/Trados.
Just some quick comments about my experience with MemoQ:
- Office 2000/2003/2007 / INX / HTML/XML and bilingual DOC/RTF: No problem at all. On top of that, you can also translate Framemaker's MIF files natively without any conversion with Trados' STagger. Additional note: Please notice however that for Office files you need to have the corresponding version of Office installed in your machine. For Office 2007 files, you can still have Office 2003/XP with the Office 2007 compatibility add-in by Microsoft (you don't need to have Office 2007 in the machine).
- PDF files: Yes, you can open them in MemoQ but cannot save as PDF as far as I am aware. You get a bilingual DOC file, I think. Maybe you want to run this through Kilgray and let them tell you what they have in mind for the future.
- TTX files: Indeed MemoQ handles these nicely (about 50% of all our work here is TTX-based). The only drawback as already discussed is that you have to presegment the TTX files with any Trados version. I think even an evaluation version can let you do that (probably even after expiry of the full-functionality period).
I am quite happy we chose MemoQ here in our 4-people team instead of following out natural path which would have been Studio. For a fraction of the cost of a Trados TMS server, we use MemoQ Server version and are thrilled about the tool and how it helps us be more productive, despite a couple of things we would like to see improved (join/split segments in server-based projects is the main one).
(Edited to add a note about Office compatibility).
[Edited at 2010-08-20 09:54 GMT]
| | | | | presegmentation of TTX | Aug 20, 2010 |
Thanks, Tomás!
And are there any CAT tools where the presegmentation in Trados isn't necessary to be able to handle TTX files?
| | | | | PDF... Trados formats.... terminology... | Aug 20, 2010 |
Glocalise wrote:
Regarding the ease-of-use and the "intuitive nature" of several CAT tools, this is indeed something I will check via the trial versions which are available.
However, my follow-up question concerns the ease with which CAT tools handle specific file formats. I'm actually looking for the tool that is most efficient in handling these file formats: Office 2000/2003/2007 files, PDF,
Forgot PDF.
Although SDL claims Studio translates PDFs, it works ONLY for very clean and simple ones.
I.e. I never managed to process trickier files (let's say, AutoCAD drawings printed to PDF or simply files with complex layout).
The only reliable way is OCR.
INX, HTML/XML, TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF. From what I gathered the first few file formats shouldn't pose many problems for most CATs, but TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF are a bit trickier if one isn't to use Studio/Trados.
In fact, you need only Trados demo version in order to presegment the TTX and/or bilingual DOC, then any CAT should do the job.
The problem is you should understand it's logic and feel good with it.
Can you help me in determining which CAT (other than Studio/Trados) is able to handle those specific TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF files in an efficient manner (without the need of owning Studio/Trados's TagEditor)?
Probably memoQ, although it doesn't handle footnotes in DOC/RTF.
It's not a major issue for me (I work mainly on TTX files) but in some cases it may be very annoying,
FYI, I'm just a bit reluctant of jumping on the Studio-train after having researched this forum and some other sources. It seems it's pretty buggy,
Studio itself is getting better but the terminology management module (Multiterm) is an unstable crapware.
E.g., today, when I see the last discussed issues on the Trados forum (approx. 15 which fit on my screen), I see 5 topics related to some very basic failures i.e. non working terminology recognition, failure adding terms etc.
Cheers
GG
| | |
|
|
|
| Unsegmented TTX files in memoQ, Swordfish etc. | Aug 20, 2010 |
Glocalise wrote:
And are there any CAT tools where the presegmentation in Trados isn't necessary to be able to handle TTX files?
In fact, many CATs are able to process TTX files in this way, including memoQ itself but the resulting TTX may be "strange" and this workflow is not recommended.
E.g. heavily tagged TTX files processed directly in MQ may have an absurd segmentation, the presegmented ones are OK.
I didn't test it thoroughly for other tools, so I can't tell you the way (e.g.) Swordfish does it is correctly or no.
In the same way than for MQ, this approach is possible but not recommended.
Cheers
GG
| | | | | TTX is an unpublished specification | Aug 20, 2010 |
Glocalise wrote:
And are there any CAT tools where the presegmentation in Trados isn't necessary to be able to handle TTX files?
Unfortunately, as far as I am aware neither Trados in the old times nor SDL have ever published the TTX specification, so even if there could be tools presegmenting TTX files, chances are that they do not create the exact presegmentation done by Trados, thus creating problems at your customers. The safest procedure is to presegment with a demo version of Trados.
[Edited at 2010-08-20 10:25 GMT]
| | | | NMR (X)
France
Local time: 06:48
français vers néerlandais
+ ...
| Bilingual .doc and .rtf | Aug 20, 2010 |
Glocalise wrote:
but TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF are a bit trickier if one isn't to use Studio/Trados.
Can you help me in determining which CAT (other than Studio/Trados) is able to handle those specific TTX and bilingual DOC/RTF files in an efficient manner (without the need of owning Studio/Trados's TagEditor)?
Wordfast Classic reads, creates and delivers bilingual .doc and .rtf files which are entirely compatible. Never had any problem with that.
WF Pro handles in a vey efficient way ppt, xls, inx et htm, and reads pdf (I didn't try other formats).
| | | | Kevin Lossner 
Portugal
Local time: 05:48
allemand vers anglais
+ ...
| Precautions with TTX | Aug 20, 2010 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
... if there could be tools presegmenting TTX files, chances are that they do not create the exact presegmentation done by Trados, thus creating problems at your customers. The safest procedure is to presegment with a demo version of Trados.
And always, always, always do a round-trip test on your TTX (with copying source to target for all segments) to ensure that you'll be able to get a target file in the end! Even with pure Trados work this is sometimes a risk, though versions play a big role here. Some versions of TagEditor choke if there are no line feeds after section breaks and other craziness.
| | |
|
|
|
Roy Oestensen
Danemark
Local time: 06:48
Membre (2010)
anglais vers Norvégien (Bokmål)
+ ...
| You may consider the price of upgrades, depending on your budget | Aug 20, 2010 |
If you are working full time as a translator, I don't think the cost of the CAT tool would be that important in the long run, as it hopefully will help you recuperate the cost. I may mention, though, that I have used Dejavu since version 2 (1995 - 15 years ago!), and in that time I've only paid for 2 upgrades, i.e. to version 3 and then to version X, i.e. the current one.
Unpaid updates, on the other hand, are released from time to time.
To me a combination of a Trados... See more If you are working full time as a translator, I don't think the cost of the CAT tool would be that important in the long run, as it hopefully will help you recuperate the cost. I may mention, though, that I have used Dejavu since version 2 (1995 - 15 years ago!), and in that time I've only paid for 2 upgrades, i.e. to version 3 and then to version X, i.e. the current one.
Unpaid updates, on the other hand, are released from time to time.
To me a combination of a Trados and Dejavu is a must, though, as I use Workbench (Trados) to presegment ttx files before import into Dejavu. I far prefer the user interface of Dejavu over Trados, but I have to prepare Trados files in Trados before I can import them into Dejavu.
Tomás Cano Binder mentions, by the way, that you could presegment in a demo copy of Trados. At least then it should be safe to import the files into other CAT tools. I at least cannot remember having had problems in this area working with ttx files in Dejavu.
But in the end I agree with others: Download a demo of each tool and try them yourself to see how you like the interface. Then, if you have two or more that you feel are more or less equal - you may consider price. You also need to consider if the tool can import all those file formats you expect to work with. inx files (Indesign) are quite important these days, so for many that format is a must. And may you for instance expect Framemaker files (I've forgotten the file format as it's some time since I worked with that format last)?
I wish you all the best in your choosing the CAT tool that works for you.
Roy ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages sur ce sujet: < [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 » Which CAT to choose? | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
