We have touched upon interoperability in our terminology lifecycle management posts, but today we arrived at a major milestone with our back-end tool, so it’s time for a second helping. It may seem redundant to develop our own software that converts and manages data, when solutions that are available in every LSP’s toolbox, such as qTerm, MultiTerm or Swordfish handle conversion as well to a certain extent. On the bright side, their interoperability capabilities satisfy straightforward and elementary processes; however, as complexity rises, their limitations become apparent.
A unique feature of providing a service is the disparity between the implementation / scope of offerings and the perceived / expected suitability. Translation and localization is no different – being a blend of management, linguistics, software engineering, research and of course translation, it is not always trivial to understand the inner workings. Customers may as well ask: What does a service encompass and why? How does cost relate to value? What pieces of information may help create the best fitting output? Why not rely on automation in every step of the way? What is the breakdown of the production timeline? Which management path to take or file format to use? And why are these questions important at all? On the other, the provider’s side of the coin, customer priorities and goals are not always clear.
A man who needs no introduction, Renato Beninatto writes in his January post about the zeitgeist of the industry, as he does every year. As Renato puts it, 2013 might be a year for evolution, rather than revolution, when things are settling down. While we are standing in anticipation for the next big thing, let’s put on our mythbusting cap, and look into the tropes of today’s localization world. In the upcoming series of posts, we check on the evolutionary state of the most prevalent, already mature concepts. And when the revolution comes, we hope they won’t be the first against the wall either. Continue reading
After having set off on various tangents about terminology lifecycle management that caters to a truly niche but savvy audience, let’s keep it lean and tight today with a case study about how a unified localization pipeline:
- Reduced validation overhead
- Ensured consistency between cross-dependent translations running in parallel
- Facilitated collaboration
- Resulted in quicker turnaround times and 15% growth in the translation output
- Streamlined maintenance processes and thus reduced individual project costs
- Cleared up roles and responsibilities