Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: QA Tool?
Poster: Samuel Murray
Post title: @Suzanne
[quote]Suzanne Chabot wrote:
I just found this name in the Translator Tool Box book at the section about QA...[/quote]
I just had a look at that section in the book, and I see that this section is about active QA, as opposed to passive QA. Often, when translators speak of "a QA tool" (such as Xbench), they mean a passive tool, i.e. the tool does all the QA checks itself, and simply presents the translator with a report that shows all the flags, and then it's up to the translator to check which flags are actual errors. Active QA is when a human manually categorizes errors by type and severity, and recommends edits.
According to the book, Translate5 is one of the translation environments that support the MQM method of active QA. The tool makes it somewhat easier for reviewers to gather errors and enter them into the [L]QA report. A tool like this is not useful for a freelance translator unless the translator has been asked by a client to perform such a QA task, and clients who commission such tasks typically have established LQA methods in place, so you won't be able to use the LQA capabilities of a separate tool anyway.
Topic: QA Tool?
Poster: Samuel Murray
Post title: @Suzanne
[quote]Suzanne Chabot wrote:
I just found this name in the Translator Tool Box book at the section about QA...[/quote]
I just had a look at that section in the book, and I see that this section is about active QA, as opposed to passive QA. Often, when translators speak of "a QA tool" (such as Xbench), they mean a passive tool, i.e. the tool does all the QA checks itself, and simply presents the translator with a report that shows all the flags, and then it's up to the translator to check which flags are actual errors. Active QA is when a human manually categorizes errors by type and severity, and recommends edits.
According to the book, Translate5 is one of the translation environments that support the MQM method of active QA. The tool makes it somewhat easier for reviewers to gather errors and enter them into the [L]QA report. A tool like this is not useful for a freelance translator unless the translator has been asked by a client to perform such a QA task, and clients who commission such tasks typically have established LQA methods in place, so you won't be able to use the LQA capabilities of a separate tool anyway.