Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Which CAT tools do provide special features for proofreading/reviewing?
Poster: Samuel Murray
Post title: @German
[quote]German Dutch Engineering Translation wrote:
This post is to do an inventory, which CAT tools do provide special features for proofreading/reviewing, like tracking (but not necessarily limited to this feature)? [/quote]
WFC can obviously be used for editing, since it runs inside of Word, but the tracked edits are not saved in the TM (so that it isn't clear which text was inserted or deleted when looking at a TM match).
WFP3 and WFP6 both keep track of what the previous translator/reviewer did (unless the translator deletes that information from the file, whether deliberately or just because he edits the file in a program that strips that stuff from the file), and you can export a report that shows the changes in a table format.
What I miss from most CAT tools w.r.t. reviewing is the ability to do quicker concordance searches for terms or phrases, or even automatic (smart) concordance look-ups so that the reviewer can see how a term was translated in other segments, without having to manually initiate the look-up.
Another thing that I dislike is how difficult it is to add comments, to view comments and to edit or reply to comments. In MemoQ, for example, I can't scroll up and down while I'm viewing or editing a comment (who thought that that would be a good idea??). In Trados, I sometimes can and sometimes can't write a comment about a specific word (sometimes you have to write a comment that highlights the entire segment).
Topic: Which CAT tools do provide special features for proofreading/reviewing?
Poster: Samuel Murray
Post title: @German
[quote]German Dutch Engineering Translation wrote:
This post is to do an inventory, which CAT tools do provide special features for proofreading/reviewing, like tracking (but not necessarily limited to this feature)? [/quote]
WFC can obviously be used for editing, since it runs inside of Word, but the tracked edits are not saved in the TM (so that it isn't clear which text was inserted or deleted when looking at a TM match).
WFP3 and WFP6 both keep track of what the previous translator/reviewer did (unless the translator deletes that information from the file, whether deliberately or just because he edits the file in a program that strips that stuff from the file), and you can export a report that shows the changes in a table format.
What I miss from most CAT tools w.r.t. reviewing is the ability to do quicker concordance searches for terms or phrases, or even automatic (smart) concordance look-ups so that the reviewer can see how a term was translated in other segments, without having to manually initiate the look-up.
Another thing that I dislike is how difficult it is to add comments, to view comments and to edit or reply to comments. In MemoQ, for example, I can't scroll up and down while I'm viewing or editing a comment (who thought that that would be a good idea??). In Trados, I sometimes can and sometimes can't write a comment about a specific word (sometimes you have to write a comment that highlights the entire segment).