Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Working on projects where your PM has a different CAT tool than yours (i.e. SDL vs Wordfast etc.)
Poster: Fi2 n Co
Post title: Gathering around the workarounds, so we start!
[quote]Luca Tutino wrote:
Thank you for your post. CAT tools seem to be quite inter-compatible lately, and this is certainly an important possibility for us. Still, it can be problematic in some case, like for instance:
- A client sends a specific CAT package and wants a return package
- They ask for "track change" review or ask to look at a track changed review
- They send a dtp exported file (mif etc.): will the compatible cat handle the conversion as well and in a compatible way?
- ...
Do you have good workarounds for these? [/quote]
Thank you for your answer, it fits exactly the purpose of this thread!
A package is often a folder with many resources in it. You should be able to open it and see the files. In the case of an SDL package,
You could handle the sdlxliff in your CAT tool if it supports it.
The sdltm could be converted to tmx and uploaded in your CAT tool. You could use WF Converter to that effect, Dominique Pivard (CAT Guru) has a great video on it here: [url removed]
You could then handle the sdltb in the same way with the same tool.
You could then replace the files in package and return it and see how it goes.
Tracked changes are often dealt with outside of CAT tools using review exports that are in MS Word formats, so no issue here.
The issue will often rise when your PM is less CAT-Tool knowledgeable than you are and doesn’t want to spend an extra 5 mins to handle a few things manually.
Unfortunately, I don’t have a workaround for every situation, and that’s exactly the purpose of this thread, because there definitely needs to be more interoperability between the CAT tools and meanwhile the more knowledge is available to face the matter, the better it will be for translators and for translation quality.
My bests 😊
Topic: Working on projects where your PM has a different CAT tool than yours (i.e. SDL vs Wordfast etc.)
Poster: Fi2 n Co
Post title: Gathering around the workarounds, so we start!
[quote]Luca Tutino wrote:
Thank you for your post. CAT tools seem to be quite inter-compatible lately, and this is certainly an important possibility for us. Still, it can be problematic in some case, like for instance:
- A client sends a specific CAT package and wants a return package
- They ask for "track change" review or ask to look at a track changed review
- They send a dtp exported file (mif etc.): will the compatible cat handle the conversion as well and in a compatible way?
- ...
Do you have good workarounds for these? [/quote]
Thank you for your answer, it fits exactly the purpose of this thread!
A package is often a folder with many resources in it. You should be able to open it and see the files. In the case of an SDL package,
You could handle the sdlxliff in your CAT tool if it supports it.
The sdltm could be converted to tmx and uploaded in your CAT tool. You could use WF Converter to that effect, Dominique Pivard (CAT Guru) has a great video on it here: [url removed]
You could then handle the sdltb in the same way with the same tool.
You could then replace the files in package and return it and see how it goes.
Tracked changes are often dealt with outside of CAT tools using review exports that are in MS Word formats, so no issue here.
The issue will often rise when your PM is less CAT-Tool knowledgeable than you are and doesn’t want to spend an extra 5 mins to handle a few things manually.
Unfortunately, I don’t have a workaround for every situation, and that’s exactly the purpose of this thread, because there definitely needs to be more interoperability between the CAT tools and meanwhile the more knowledge is available to face the matter, the better it will be for translators and for translation quality.
My bests 😊