Transcript Tek Translation International - Localisation Research Centre

Open standards in use in localisation
- an engineering approach
Andrés Vega,
LRC XIII Localisation4All, Dublin, Ireland
2nd October 2008
About the Author - Andrés Vega
8+ years of experience as a Localisation Engineer with Tek Translation International.
Specializing in complex project engineering with special focus on CMS, encodings and
complex scripts.
Previous work as a programming languages teacher: OO programming, C and Java.
Background in Chemistry and Healthcare.
Agenda
 Why Standards?
 Unicode
 OpenType Fonts
 XML
 CMS
 TMX
 XLIFF
 TBX and SRX
 Final thoughts and Q&A
Why Standards?
 Allow faster technology development
 Assembling standard components
 Concentrating effort on specialisation
 Increase competence, focused on features (not compatibility)
 Facilitate inter-operability
 Open standards allow information to be shared
(Not locked on proprietary standards)
 Complementary tools may be developed
 Choose tool/resource for each job
 Guarantee future compatibility
 Provide conformance validation mechanisms
 Standard verification serves as QA procedure
Unicode
 Challenges
 Too Many Character sets:
Three great ‘families’ (ANSI, DBCS, BiDi): three application types
 Multilingual data (storage, display, processing)
 Cross-platform and character set inter-conversion issues
 What Unicode is
 Universal character encoding standard by the Unicode Consortium
 21-bit character set with 3 main encoding forms (UTF-32, UTF-16, UTF-8)
 Not just the character set
 Character properties (Name, Category, Casing, Decomposition, …)
 Annexes, Technical Reports: (Comparison, Sorting, Hyphenation, …)
 What Unicode is not
 Glyph repertoire: glyphs provided are examples, not canonical!
 Unicode alone does not provide language support!
Unicode (Benefits and Issues)
 Unicode benefits






One vendor neutral encoding standard for all languages
Stable, but it keeps evolving
Multilingual rendering/storage/transfer (No conversion - No corruption)
Unified content processes (Globalized, Web enabled)
Internationalisation
Easy conversion from/to/between legacy codepages
 Issues or drawbacks with Unicode




Size (ANSI: 1byte, DBCS: 2byte, UTF-8 1-4 byte, UTF-16 2-4 byte)
UniHan related (Font dependence, ‘Gaiji’ and variants)
Inconsistencies on implementation choices across scripts
Several ways to generate pre-composed characters
 Implementation issues
 Script Enabling requires: Input, Display, Storage, Retrieval, Output
 Bidirectional support, Complex Scripts issues
 Implementation status
Unicode (Transition Issues)
 Transition issues
 Mixed content: legacy and UTF8 (FrameMaker)
ANSI Content
UTF-8 Content
UTF-8 Content
ANSI Variables
ANSI Variables
ANSI Variables
ANSI Template
ANSI Template
ANSI Template
FM8 + update
English seen OK
Import old
vars & template
FM7
version
UTF-8 Content
TTX
Corrupt Vars
ANSI Template
corrupted
variables
Filter
corrupts ANSI
 Localisation tools, filters, etc not fully adapted or tested
Example: Style names containing extended characters
New filter for FrameMaker 8:
English names are OK (UTF-8 = ASCII)
German designed file:
Filter does not accept UTF-8 Style names
 Backwards conversions: Unicode version saved as non-Unicode version
Unicode Workflow
 Pre-Unicode Workflow (FrameMaker)
Files to localize
File Preparation
Translation & Review
Back Conversion
DTP and Merge
English
Western RTF
Western RTF and fonts
FM (Design font)
Multilingual
FrameMaker
CE RTF
CE RTF and fonts
FM (CE font)
Target
Cyrillic RTF
Cyrillic RTF and fonts
FM (Cyrillic font)
Turkish RTF
Turkish RTF and fonts
FM (Turkish font)
Greek RTF
Greek RTF and fonts
FM (Greek font)
Baltic RTF
Baltic RTF and fonts
FM (Baltic font)
With Design
Fonts
Document
With several
ANSI fonts
Character corruption risks in all orange (middle 3 groups) steps
Final document presents issues in TOC and index generation and in searches
Unicode Workflow:
English
FrameMaker
Design Fonts
UTF-8 XML
UTF-16 TTX and fonts
• UTF-8 FM with
original design
fonts
Multilingual
Document &
Design Fonts
OpenType fonts
 Challenges
 Two font families (TrueType and PostScript), two font technologies
 Inter-platform issues
 Benefits of Open Type
 Support large character sets (Unicode, multiscript)
 Glyph variants supported: Solves Unicode UniHan ambiguities
 Supports advanced typography
 Font embedding control
 Features
 Contain both TrueType and PostScript outline data
 Glyph substitution
 Glyph positioning
 Script and language information
XML
 eXtensible Markup Language (Meta-language for markup languages)
 Used to define, share and validate information (data and structure)
 An XML document contains




XML declaration :
<?xml version='1.1' encoding='UTF-8' standalone='yes'?>
Document Type declaration(s) <!DOCTYPE root SYSTEM “rootDTD.dtd" >
Elements
<element attribute=“value”>Content</element> or <element/>
Other: comments, entities/NCRs, instructions, conditional sections
 Specific Syntax (well-formed XML)
 Only one root element
 Tags in nested open/close pairs: <tag> </tag>
 Element names obey certain conventions
 Elements may contain attributes
 DTD (Valid XML)
 Defines rules on structure, valid tags and attributes and valid data
 Guarantees reliable data exchange between different systems
 Can be included in each XML, but is normally external
XML (Benefits)
 Benefits
 Simple (XML is plain text) but can embed any content type
 Platform independent, Unicode encoded
 Content is easily validated cross-platform: data transfer is safer
 Structured (defines structural relationships within data)
 Open and Extensible well supported standard
 Metadata and version control capable
 Format independent
 Powerful data transformation tools (XSL): Multiple outputs
XML (Localisation benefits and issues)
 Localisation benefits
 Structured: Content detached & merged (updates handling)
 XML support easily implemented on Localisation processes/tools
 Easy validation versus DTD
 Extensible: XML based localisation standards: XLIFF, TMX, TBX,...
 Metadata (source/target version control, updates, element status)
 Format independent
 Single-sourcing (localized once, published into many formats)
 Source content and formatting changes are not inter-dependant
 Content localisation and proofreading before formatting (DTP)
 Issues
 Transition needs to be well planned and performed
 Segmentation issues (DTD needs to be multilingual aware)
CMS
 What are Content Management Systems?
 Set of tools configured around a data repository (database)
 Designed to manage information in small meaningful bits
 Information is isolated from format
 Have workflow capabilities, version control and change tracking
 Store localized content layers (as other alternative content layers)
 General benefits
 Granularity (no redundancy)
 Reuse (content reuse and multi output)
 Improved Quality and Consistency
 Single-source and multi-publishing
 Easy rebranding/reformatting
 Metadata info and version control
 Workflow and Automation
 Localisation benefits
 Workflow status control features
 Localisation of updates via content deltas: improved time-to-market
 Localisation independent from output format (better matching)
CMS (Issues)
 Issues
 Authoring for reuse (topic model, single-source, cross-reference)
 Segmentation issues
Quark
Xxxx Xxxx
Xxxx xxxx
Xxxx xxxx
CMS
LF Chars (0A) No Validation!
Translation in XML
LF not visible
Broken segmentation
LF also formats lists
Segmentation issue
Workaround
LF converted to tag
Meaningful tags internal
Solution
Remove meaningless LF
Export remaining as tags
 Localisation readiness
 CMS must be multilingual enabled (storage, I/O, processing)
 Localisation workflow support
 Strong version control and version rollback
 Capability to export up-to-date paired TM content
 Integration with LQA tools
 Not to increase ROI in the short run (DTP is still needed!!)
CMS Localisation Workflow
Tek
Client
Select only delta content
XML
CMS
XML
XML
Full document in XML
Translation
(TTX format)
Revision
(TTX format)
Prepared for Proofreading
Content Validation in
(Colour-coded RTF format)
Tracked-changes RTF
Insertion of Validation
changes (TTX & TMs)
Preprocessing of XML
Import to FrameMaker
Delivery in FrameMaker
Client Validators
DTP in FrameMaker
Layout & Consistence
Validation in PDF file
TMX
 What is TMX?
 Translation Memory eXchange
 Standard by LISA (Localisation Standards Industry Association)
 Provides a standard method for TM data description
 XML-compliant (validated against its TMX DTD)
 Uses other ISO standards for date, time, lang, country
 Consists of
 Container format specification
 Translation unit elements <tu>
 Optional format description elements (font change,...)
 Subflows (footnotes, index entries)
 Low-level meta-markup format for segment content
 Segment element <seg>
TMX (Benefits and Drawbacks)
 Benefits
 Transfer TM assets across tools/vendors
 Provides clients with control over their translated assets
 Non-proprietary and vendor neutral
 Can be integrated with LQA tools
 Provides Translators/Vendors with freedom of tool choice
 Specialized tools share TM assets
 Tools may be outdated, assets will not
 Facilitates work distribution/outsourcing
 Issues
 Tag handling
 TMX DTD cannot validate inline codes
 TMX compliance level
 Segmentation issues
XLIFF
 Xml Localisation Inter-exchange File Format
 Standard by LISA Special Interest Group OSCAR
 Tool-neutral XML-based standard localisation resource container format
 To store/transfer/manipulate localizable content, context and other info
 Has Built-in support for CAT tools and related standards (TBX, TMX)
 Features:
 Translation suggestions (TM, Glossary, MT) to approve or edit
 Metadata: Translate, notes, context info, version
 Hierarchical data structures
 Abstraction of formatting and inline codes:
 Structural formatting stored in the skeleton file
 Inline formatting can be dealt with two ways
Replaced by g (paired) and x (isolated) tags (OpenTag style)
Encapsulated into bpt, ept (paired), it or ph (isolated) tags
XLIFF (Description)
 Separates localizable and non-localizable content
 Non-localisable: Skeleton (separate or embedded)
 Localizable 'file' Elements with Header (metadata) and Body
 Body can contain 'trans-unit' and 'bin-unit' elements
 Each trans-unit can have
<trans-unit id="abc123" resname="resourceID" restype="string" translate="yes">
unique id, resource id, resource type, translate yes/no
<source xml:lang="en-US">Translatable content.</source>
Translatable content source and language
<target xml:lang="es" state="needs-review-translation">Traducción.</target>
Currently validated translation
<alt-trans match-quality="100%" tool="TM">
<source>Translatable content.</source>
<target xml:lang="es">Contenido traducible.</target>
</alt-trans>
alt-trans translation suggestion(s)
</trans-unit> (closing tag)
XLIFF (Benefits and Drawbacks)
 Benefits: For the translation process







One common format on which to translate
Control on Translatable/Non-translatable content
Better information handling (context, notes, metadata)
Better TM matching due to formatting abstraction
Concurrent tool processing visible at review stage
Support for all localisation phases
Supports metrics info on each trans-unit
 Benefits: For localisation tool developers
 Common platform for tool developers to write to
 Easy adoption of new formats (new filters to XLIFF)
 All generic XML processing benefits
 Drawbacks
 Conversion tools needed into XLIFF and back
 Many XLIFF features are not implemented by most tools
 Segmentation is inherent to XLIFF file generation
 As opposed to tailored tools, WYSIWYG is difficult to attain
XLIFF Workflow
 No XLIFF Scenario
Translator A
Many Formats!
.mif
.xml
.ht
m
.dl
l
.rc
SGML Editor
Reviewer A
Software Editor
Translator B
.rtf
.resx
Reviewer B
XLIFF Scenario
Translator A
Many Filters!
SGML Editor
Reviewer A
.mif
.rc
.xml
.dl
l
.ht
m
XLIFF
.rtf
Translator B
.resx
Software Editor
Reviewer B
Other LISA standards: TBX, SRX
TBX
 What is TBX?
 Term Base eXchange standard by LISA
 XML based, vendor-neutral, open standard
 Benefits
 Better control of terminology (source consistency)
 Reduced glossarisation effort (localisation phase)
 Platform and tool independent glossaries (global consistency)
Current status
 TBX Basic (Lighter approach)
 TBX Checker
SRX
 What is SRX?
 Segmentation Rules eXchange format
 Describes how localisation tools segment text for processing
 Benefits
 Standardises segmentation process (avoid segmentation issues)
Final Thoughts
Unicode
 Use Always: If tool does not support it, convert at end stage
XML
 Powerful for single-source, multi-output requirements
CMS
 Costly. Depends on volume. First consider XML model, then migrate
TMX
 Use for safe TM tool to tool transfer, specially software into doc
XLIFF
 Not fully implemented. Good alternative for Java or Web content.
 Use it to unify side processes (LQA)
TBX
 Use to exchange glossary info. Good for clients
SRX
 Very much need but lacks implementation.
About Tek:
Multilingual translation and localisation business solutions
designed to meet the needs of Life Sciences, IT and Manufacturing
• Since 1961
• Over 65
languages
• Expert
Resources
and Service
• Located in
US, Spain,
Brazil, China
Ireland, UK,
Denmark
•
•
•
•
• Scalability
• Simplification
and
standardisation
• ISO 9001:2000
certification
• Follow-the-sun
• Solutions-based
approach for
best business
value
Tek OneWorld Platform for your language & industry needs
Business Intelligence
Language Quality Solutions
Open Connectivity, WW Collaboration
Thank You
Q&A
Andrés Vega Muñoz
Localisation Engineer
Tek Translation International
Email: [email protected]
www.tektrans.com