April 2008 Archives

Our April 16th webinar on translation-oriented authoring hosted by across Systems was an excellent 360 degree view of its value from a consultancy, language service provider, and end-user perspective. Thanks to Richard Sikes from LocFlowTech, Inc., Peter Argondizzo from Argo Translation, Inc., and Amy Karls from QuadTech for and a job well done! Access the recording here.

As Sikes noted in his opening remarks, decisions that get made in one part of an organization often show up as costs in another area. This is particularly true of translation and localization costs. Those who create and translate product content (user guides, operator manuals, quick start guides, online help, and the list goes on...) understand the downstream effect of decisions made under pressure all too well.

According to Karls, demand for multilingual product support content consistently is increasing, but timelines and resources are most assuredly not. Isolated story? We think not. Check out the webinar poll on the number of language outputs required from our audience, largely technical documentation folks.

Now check out the range of tools our audience is using to create product support content.

I believe there is not a single technical writer who intends to create inconsistencies or confusion for their translator counterparts. But stuff happens. Like "hurry up" pressure. Like "we lost our editor" pressure. Like "who's got the latest version of the Style Guide pressure."

According to Argondizzo, translation-oriented authoring has numerous advantages, among them:

• Unlocks never before utilized value of translation memory database for writers


• Strengthens partnership with language service provider and writers


• Provides content creators with a different perspective of translation memory usage


• Easy to understand and track savings


• Time saved by author not rewriting text


• Consistency for additional reuse in other channels


• Regulatory concerns in rewriting text that already exists

I wholeheartedly agree. Check out the webinar recording. The advantages of "assistance" is demonstrable and impressive, whether one calls it authoring assistance, translation-oriented authoring, or controlled authoring.

The holy grail in translation is the speed versus quality dilemma. That creates controversy. Here's what we've noted after posting our Multilingual Social Networking Alert citing Facebook's crowdsourcing effort:

• Article: Facebook asks users to translate new versions for free
• Video: Facebook's Spanish Translation Misses the Mark
  
• Blog: No, Getting Users To Translate Facebook Into Other Languages Isn't Exploitation
  
• Article: Facebook's Community Translation: Savvy or Just Cheap?
  

No doubt that these references are the tip of an iceberg. How to say "poke" in different languages is clearly not the only conversation going on. And BTW, here's Facebook's Translation Application.

At the end of March, the W3C announced the launch of the Internationalization Tag Set (ITS) Interest Group (IG) as a forum to foster a community of users that promotes the tag set's adoption and further development. Like Unicode's CLDR initiative, the emphasis on community interaction and collaboration underscores the ever-increasing, Web-driven impact of cooperative spirit.

As the Web nears its 20th birthday, we would imagine efforts such as ITS IG continue to be music to the ears of its inventor and W3C founder, Tim Berners-Lee. This particular interest group is certainly not the first nor the last of the educational and outreach efforts the W3C has launched since 1994.

It is also not the first nor the last of the activities from W3C's Internationalization (I18n) Activity, known worldwide as simply I18n. The mission? "To ensure that W3C's formats and protocols are usable worldwide in all languages and in all writing systems." The goals? Ensure universal access, support the internationalization and localization of documents, and help reduce the time and cost associated with internationalization and localization projects. Consistent and admirable objectives, described eloquently by Richard Ishida, Activity Lead for the I18n Core Working Group in his article, It's All About Customer Focus.

I18n accomplishments include a treasure trove of information from specifications and recommendations to educational materials to the newest initiative, hosting the Planet I18n Blog aggregator. Worth checking out; give yourself time to stay a while.

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing Arle Lommel, LISA OSCAR Standards Chair, to discuss the importance of Unicode's Common Locale Data Repository (CLDR) project, which collects and provides data such as date/time formats, numeric formatting, translated language and country names, and time zone information that is needed to support globalization.

LC: What is the CLDR?
AL: The Common Locale Data Repository is a volunteer-developed and maintained resource coordinated and administered by the Unicode Consortium that is available for free. Its goal is to gather basic linguistic information for various "locales," essentially combinations of a language and a location, like French in Switzerland.

LC: What does the resource encompass?
AL: CLDR gathers things like lists of language and country names, date formats, time zone names, and so forth. This is critical knowledge to know when developing projects for the markets represented by specific locales. By drilling down past the language level to look at the market level, CLDR data is designed to be relevant for a specific area of the world. Think of the difference between U.S. and British English, for example. You would clearly have a problem if British spellings were used in a U.S. project or prices appeared like "£10.54" instead of "$10.54." Problems like these are very common when product developers don't think through what the implications of their design decisions will be.

LC: What other issues does CLDR address?
AL: Other problems addressed by CLDR include the numeric form of dates, where something like "04.05.06" could mean "April 5, 2006," "May 4, 2006," or even "May 6, 2004," depending on where you live. Clearly you have to know what people expect.

LC: What is the advantage of using CLDR?
AL: It makes resources available to anyone, at no cost. Without something like the CLDR, one would need to investigate all of market issues, pay to translate things like country names into each language, and so forth. Activities such as this can add significantly to the cost of a project. The CLDR provides them for free and provides the critical advantage of consistency.

LC: Why should content creators care about the CLDR?
AL: At LISA we have heard time and again that not taking international issues into consideration from a project's earliest phases doubles the cost of a project and makes it take twice as long. While many issues relate to decisions made by programmers, some of the issues do relate to the job of technical authors and other content creators. While it's unlikely that a technical writer will need to use a CLDR list of language names in Finnish directly, for instance, the content creator might design an online form in which a user fills out what language he or she would like to be contacted in. If there is insufficient room to display the language name because it is longer in Finnish (a common problem when going from English to Finnish), the end user may have difficulty, something that could have been prevented by the content author if he or she had been given the resources to test the design early on. The CLDR makes the information available that allows authors to prevent basic problems that create issues for users around the world.

LC: How can professionals contribute to the CLDR?
AL: Right now the biggest need of the CLDR is for native (or very good) speakers of non-English languages to (1) supply missing data, and (2) verify that existing data points are correct. Because the CLDR is volunteer driven, people of all levels of competence and ability are able to contribute as much or as little as they want. Unicode welcomes this participation. The real need is for people to know about and use the CLDR. In my experience even the savviest of developers often don't know about the CLDR and what it contains, so they spend time and money on recreating a resource that they could have for free.

LC: How is LISA supporting CLDR?
AL: We are committed to supporting Unicode and the CLDR, so we have launched an initiative where people who sign up with LISA to contribute to the CLDR and who spend ten or more hours working on the project are eligible to receive individual LISA membership for a year as a token of our appreciation for their contribution. So if any readers have the needed language/locale skills to supply data missing from the CLDR or to review existing data, they can contact me to get started.

April Fool's Day usually brings out the kid in all of us, making for some fun and interesting spoofs. The April 1st press release that the United Nations was banning all "unnecessary languages" brought out the worried adult in me pretty quickly. Turns out I was spoofed -- thankfully.

OTOH, the arrogance inherent to "all will be English" begs the question, are many organizations being spoofed on a daily basis by succumbing to this theory? And is it not scarily interesting that reading the entire article as a source of truth doesn't sound too far off given the lack of global content -- not only translated, but localized -- in numerous industries? PRWeb claimed the article "too close for comfort," but valuable for revealing serious issues in the global community.

Posted by EnglishClub.com, the article stated, "By 2049, when all languages other than English will have been phased out, the only language that will have international sanction will be English." Pretty ominous sounding stuff. Enough to generate 315 extremely emotional responses to the blog entry between March 31 and April 3rd. Scary but false.

As the United Nations continues to promote 2008 as the Year of International Languages, here's a "scary but true."