March 2003 LF Color - localisation.ie · MARCH 2003 COUNTRY.focus LOCALISATION FOCUS 5 There is a real demand for localisation tools The more tools we have the lower the costs and

March 2003

€€7.50/$7.50 US7.50/$7.50 USISSN 1649-2358ISSN 1649-2358

COMPUTING IN ARABICThe Growing Need for Arabisation PAGES 6-7

Sex, Wolvesand ElvisLocalisation: There’s a whole lot of shakin’ going on ... PAGE 15

Growing TILPJoin The Institute of Localisation Professionals PAGE 3

VVOL.OL. 22,, Issue 1Issue 1Issue Sponsored By:Issue Sponsored By:

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LOCALISATION

LocalisationSummer

SchoolJune 3, 4, 5 and 6

— Limerick, IrelandJune 18, 19 and 20 — Austin, Texas, USA

PAGES 26 - 27

COMPUTING IN ARABICThe Growing Need for Arabisation PAGES 6-7

Sex, Wolvesand ElvisLocalisation: There’s a whole lot of shakin’ going on ... PAGE 15

Growing TILPJoin The Institute of Localisation Professionals PAGE 3

LocalisationSummer

SchoolJune 3, 4, 5 and 6

— Limerick, IrelandJune 18, 19 and 20 — Austin, Texas, USA

PAGES 26 - 27

University of Limerick, Ireland

Localisation Focus is the publication of theLocalisation Research Centre (LRC). It is distrib-uted to the localisation community and thoseinterested in localisation. Please notify the cen-tre if you or one of your colleagues would like toreceive Localisation Focus regularly.

Editor: Reinhard SchälerAssistant editor: Deirdre CoffeyProduction: MultiLingual Computing &Technology, Sandpoint, Idaho, USA

Published by: Localisation Research Centre(LRC), Department of Computer Science andInformation Systems (CSIS), University ofLimerick, Limerick, Ireland.

Tel. +353-61-202881Fax +353-61-202734Email: [email protected] http://www.localisation.ie

© 2003 Localisation Research Centre

PUBLISHER INFORMATION

SPONSORSHIP AND ADVERTISINGTo advertise in or to sponsor an issue

of Localisation Focus, contact the LRC formore information at [email protected] and

find out about the benefits.

Tek Translation International awardedthe new ISO 9001:2000 certification

Tek Translation International has become

one of the first localisation companies to be

awarded ISO 9001:2000.

This new accreditation has been significantly

improved and focuses mainly on three things:

customer care, measures of performance and

resource management. It is now accepted as the

leading standard for international business excel-

lence in the software localisation industry.

Visit www.tektrans.com

SDL International announces launch ofthe new “FreeTranslation.com”

SDL Plc (“SDL”), the world’s leading

provider of multilingual solutions offering scal-

able translation technology and services, has

announced the integration of a new range of

automated translation solutions into its leading

website - www.FreeTranslation.com

With more than 1.5 million visitors per week,

www.FreeTranslation.com is one of the most

popular sites on the Internet. FreeTransla-

tion.com now offers a comprehensive range of

services for any translation requirement, from

personal correspondence to the localisation of

corporate websites.

Visit www.FreeTranslation.com or www

.sdlintl.com

Amadeus has chosen WH&P to localiseeLearning site Amadeus Learning City.

WH&P, a European localisation companybased in Sophia Antipolis (France) has been cho-sen by Amadeus to localise Amadeus LearningCity, an interactive eLearning website forAmadeus customers and employees, into all lan-guages to be implemented in the coming years.“WH&P has a wide experience in web locali-sation and eLearning technology, and we appre-ciate in particular their flexibility and their highservice level”, said Marie-Christine Cyprès, theAmadeus Localisation Manager

Visit www.whp.fr or www.whp.net

Alchemy CATALYST supports next generation mobile phone technology

Alchemy Software Development hasannounced that Alchemy CATALYST now pro-vides localisation and engineering support forMicrosoft SmartPhone™, one of the next gen-eration mobile phone technology platforms.

Using Alchemy CATALYST 4.0, it will nowbe possible to translate, engineer and test mobilephone applications built using the MicrosoftSmartPhone™ Software Developer Kit.

Visit www.alchemysoftware.ie

Send your press releases to [email protected] and get your company on Localisation

Focus INDUSTRY.news page.

GET NOTICE FOR YOUR COMPANY

INDUSTRY.news

MARCH 2003 CONTENTS.editorial 3LOCALISATION FOCUS

JOIN TILP – SUBSCRIBETO LOCALISATION FOCUS

JOINyour industry’s professional organisation – The Insti-tute of Localisation Professionals,TILP. Established in

2002 by a number of highly respected professionals and supportedby companies such asAlchemy, Lionbridge, Micro-soft, Novell, Oracle, Syman-tec, and Veritest, TILP is anon-profit organisation ownedby its members. TILP’s mainobjective is to develop theprofessionalism of the indus-try. The Institute has three

membership categories.While anybody with an interest in Localisa-tion can become an associate member, there are strict entry require-ments for those who wish to become professional members.

Check out www.tilponline.org for details.Since 1996, Localisation Focus has been circulated quarterly

– free-of-charge – to around 2,500 professionals involved in theindustry. During this time, the quality of the design and contenthave dramatically improved. To reflect these developments andthe value Localisation Focus now represents, as well as allayingcosts, we have decided to put a cover price on Localisation Focus– while continuing to offer our current subscribers an opportunityto receive Localisation Focus free-of-charge for another 18 months(read on for details).

As we are also taking a major initiative to increase the circula-tion of Localisation Focus, we invite you, our current subscribers, tosubmit the names and addresses of ten of your colleagues currentlynot receiving Localisation Focus. These colleagues will receive twofree trial copies of Localisation Focus. In return, you will continue toreceive Localisation Focus for the remainder of 2003 and in 2004free-of-charge. Don’t delay – send us your ten contacts today.

And finally – TILP members will receive Localisation Focus as oneof the many membership benefits TILP offers. Therefore, visitwww.tilponline.org today and join your professional institute.

Reinhard Schäler

4Localisation in EgyptManal Amin

6STAR Shows the Way to AutomationDamian Scattergood

8LOTS Remote

29Computer-Aided Translation: A Practical IntroductionBook Review by Deirdre Coffey

30The LRC and its functions When you change address, remember to update us at [email protected]! This

way you will be able to enjoy reading your magazine wherever you go.

From the Editor

25LRC News

28Patrick Gannon

COUNTRY.focus

SPONSOR.close-up

LABORATORY.loc

26LRC Summer School

SCHOOL.loc

PERSONAL.profile

BOOKS.loc

LO

CA

LI

SA

TI

ON

C

EN

TR

AL

Opinions expressed by indvidual authors do not necessarily reflect those of the editor

10Using Web Services with Translation Memory SystemsPhilippe Mercier

12Translation is Not EnoughAlvin Yeo

15Sex, Wolves and ElvisHans Fenstermacher

17It’s Business As UsualGarry Levitt

18Smarter Process, Better ServiceReinhard Schäler

Sleepless in LocalisationShailendra Musale

19

SDLInsight 2003 ReviewRafael Guzmán

22

Readers’ Forum24

COUNTRY.focus MARCH 20034 LOCALISATION FOCUS

Arabic is the language of more than

250 million inhabitants of 18 coun-

tries, extending between the Atlantic

Ocean and the Persian Gulf. In addi-

tion to this, it is estimated that there

are 20 million Arabic speakers living in other parts

of the world. Arabic is also one of the five official

languages of the United Nations; this reflects the

importance of the language.

Although there are lots of Arabic dialects in the

Arab world, the same written language is common

to all. It is common classic Arabic that all Arabs

learn in school, read in the newspapers and listen

to on radio and TV.

The Arabic localisation industry uses common clas-

sic Arabic, thus avoiding the use of any dialects

although we can notice in some localised Arabic prod-

ucts that some of them have been localised in a non-

professional way where some terms from local dialects,

for example Egyptian or Lebanese, are used. By doing

this the user can get confused and this also can limit

the usage of the product to the local market.

Potential Markets

We can divide Arab countries into three main

regions: the Gulf region, North Africa and East

Mediterranean. This classification reflects, to great

extent, the economic power of Arabic countries.

The Gulf region, for example — Saudi Arabia,

Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain — has always

been one of the most powerful buying areas.

Although limited in population, they acquired a

very high level of automation since the eighties,

and they are keen to follow the latest technologies,

insisting to have everything in Arabic.

The other two regions, although less powerful eco-

nomically, have a much larger population. The

automation process came later in these regions.

Accordingly, the demand in these regions is much

higher than in the Gulf region with a substantial

growth expected over the next three years (estimation

is based upon a growth rate of 50% during the past

two years).

Of course the boom of internet use in these coun-

tries is a major reason for the increased demand in

these markets.

Due to all of the above mentioned facts,

international companies are showing more

and more interest in the Arabic market.

Although some of them started intro-

ducing Arabic versions during the eight-

ies, the past five years have witnessed a

real progress in this direction. More inter-

est has also been encouraged by the huge

demand for Arabic products by govern-

mental authorities. Microsoft, IBM, Oracle,

ICL (now Fujitsu), Novell and others are among

the major players in this market.

Challenges facing Arabic Localisation

Ten years ago the concept of Arabic Localisa-

tion (or what we call Arabisation) was almost

unknown. Few local companies were developing

bilingual products and fewer international com-

panies were concerned with "Arabising" their prod-

ucts. Back then, translators were computer illiterate,

developers working in Arabisation were very few

and localisation tools were almost unavailable.

The same was true for Arabic terminology in that

it had no standards with each company trying to

create its own glossary. This resulted in real chaos

in terminology standards.

Now, things have changed a lot due to the demand

for Arabic products.

Standard localisation tools are now available in

Arabic, for example Trados, SDLX and Alchemy.

Terminology is still not standardised but thanks to

professional localisation companies, it is in a much

better shape.

Arabic browsers are available and Arabic web con-

tent is growing more and more every day. Facing the

reality of having only 10% of the Arabic population

speaking English, web content offers great potential

for Arabisation.

Resources are more available than ever. This is

encouraging translators, with the availablity of

Arabic-enabled tools, to become more involved

with Technology and Localisation.

Conclusion

To sum up the current situation of Arabic locali-

sation we can simply say that:

■ The size of the Arabic market gives it very good

potential for localisation

■ The level of automation achieved, until now, shows

that the next few years will witness high growth rates

■ The market needs hardware and software in all fields

■ Arabic products have growing importance among

users

■ Introducing PCs to schools and governments gives

better chances for acquiring Arabic software

■ Increased use of the Internet and e-commerce will

create more demand for computer usage

■ Language is a real barrier on our way to the web

With more than 270

million speakers of

Arabic worldwide,

and with Internet use

becoming increasingly

popular, the market

for Arabisation is

growing rapidly.

MANAL AMIN

explores the Arab

localisation industry.

Localisation in theArab world

Manal Amin

MARCH 2003 COUNTRY.focus 5LOCALISATION FOCUS

■ There is a real demand for localisation tools

■ The more tools we have the lower the costs

and better the quality

■ More contacts with international companies

will help in developing systems, standards and

tools

■ Demand for Arabic localisation will help to

develop competition, resources and consistent

terminology that in turn will enhance the qual-

ity of localisation services. ■

Manal Amin is CEO of Arabize, an Ara-bisation company based in Cairo, Egypt.Established in 1994, Arabize works in thelocalisation of software, documentation andadvertising material Arabize also works forOracle, SAP, Microsoft, Novell, Lucent,Bowne, Vistatec, SDL and Alpnet. With itsown testing and DTP departments, Arabizehas a total of 52 employees with 35 of thembeing translators.

Layout■ Arabic is a RTL language.■ It requires logical-to-physical transfor-mation algorithms. ■ Text input is in logical order.

Logical Order: Theorder in which text istyped on a keyboard.For the most part, logi-cal order corresponds tophonetic order, from left to right same as Eng-lish (See Fig. 1).

Physical Order:Output is in physicalorder. The order inwhich text is appears on a screen fromright to left (See Fig. 2).■ There is a non-contiguous cursor move-ment and selection.■ There is also semantic re-ordering of textsections. ■ Unicode layout algorithm is applied.

Contextual Analysis■ Arabic has 36 characters and ten numericsymbols.■ It has four different shapes for each letter:initial, final, medial, or isolated (See Fig. 3).

■ The average number of shapes is 250

glyphs, more may

be required.

■ It has symmetric

swapping that

may affect the

direction of com-

mon symbols —

<, >, (,).

DiacriticsDiacritics are

like accent marks

that change the pronunciation of the letter,

which in turn may change the meaning of

a word though written in the same letters.

(See Fig. 4) It is not necessary to use dia-

critics unless its absence/presence affects the

meaning of the word. For example:

■ There are 8 main diacritics.■ These represent vowel sounds.■ There can be single or double diacritics.

Diacritics Location: Diacritics are typedafter the respective character. The markappears in different positions above, below,or to the side of a character.

Diacritics Writing Procedure: Diacriticsare put in different positions of the worddepending on the its grammatical positionin the sentence.■ Vertical kerning of diacritics (all sameheight).■ Fonts affect its display.

Ligatures■ Combination of 2 or 3 characters in 1 shape.■ Ligature selection depends on font/location.■ Ligatures affect diacritic positioning de-pending on the font.

Number Formats■ Uses Hindi/Arabic digit sets (See Fig. 5).■ Differ in countries.■ Number entering and reading styles aresimilar to Latin LTR.

BiDi software design and testing considerations■ Bi-directionality and language insertions.■ Text editing (right-to-left editing) andalignment.■ Text selection, and justification (usingKashida).■ Right-to-left orientation (dialogs, but-tons, scrollbars, rulers, columns, menu bars,Home/End).■ Gregorian and Hijri (Islamic Lunar year)calendars.■ Keyboard input in Arabic/Latin.■ Spelling and grammar checker (automaticdiacritiser).■ Searching and sorting (Alef Lam consid-eration).■ Chart types and direction.■ Mathematical and financial formulas.

Main Features of ArabicArabic is a right to left language (RTL). Accordingly, bidirectionality of software

becomes a requirement, whether the product is just Arabic enabled or fully localised.

Fig. 3: Four different shapes for the same letterinitial final medial isolated

Fig. 4: Diacritics

Fig. 1: Logical order

Fig. 2: Physical order

Fig 5. Arabic (left) and Hindi number sets

123,456.7890

COMPANY.close-up MARCH 20036 LOCALISATION FOCUS

Great quarter! But can you do it

again, plus more? This is a

question that STAR Tech-

nology Solutions has focused

on answering for many of its

clients this year. Obviously you can do it

again, by simply repeating what you just did.

However it’s the “little bit more” that causes

the problem. From experience, you can

obtain a small incremental improvement from

the lessons learnt from the quarter, but this is

not a repeatable and scalable process over the

long term.

How you gain the ability to increase pro-

ductivity consistently whilst controlling costs

is paramount to your future success. If there

is a direct relationship between your produc-

tivity output and your staff headcount then

this is not possible. Your process simply is not

scalable. The solution? Automation.

Lets Start at the Beginning…

Imagine completing a single project and you

never have to repeat doing it again. Imagine the

process and technology you might require. Hav-

ing the right problem solving and technical skills

would be all you need.

Now imagine doing this 200 times every

year? Could you remember how each project

was done? What if projects used different

processes? Would you be able to repeat a pro-

ject next month, next quarter or even next year?

How would you maintain the consistency in

process, management, quality and translation?

The key business drivers influencing how

you manage in this environment are quality,

cost and time-to-market. Each element directly

impacts your process.

Automation is the key to success. The ben-

efit automation brings is scalability, consistency

and repeatability.

The most important factor to consider

when implementing an automation strategy

is the consistency of results. Having your

process automated can deliver faster results

but the real benefit is the ability to do this

time and time again.

The Localisation Supply Chain: How theLocalisation Business Works Today

A Localising Software Publisher takes the

software product and performs a series of soft-

ware localisation engineering steps before send-

ing the product to an external translation

company. The external translation company

performs a series of localisation engineering

steps before sending the product to one or

more translators. The translator translates

the product and the translated/localised soft-

ware product works its way back up the chain

(See Fig. 1).

The problem with this traditional approach

to localisation is that an engineer performs the

engineering steps and because it is a manual

process it is time consuming and error prone.

Studies have shown that the average person has

a 2% error threshold. This impacts quality and

increases the localised product’s cost and time-

to-market.

A typical product could have some

300 plus files. Each file is passed along

the localisation process supply chain and

is touched by many individuals.

How many times is a single file opened

(touched) in your process? (See Fig.2)

A single project could have 10,000

plus touch points. If we assume even

less than a 2% error introduction along

the way, part of the process must be

repeated and retested. How much cost

does this incur for you in terms of engi-

neering, QA and project management

overhead?

When viewing where and how to

automate your process you should con-

Fig. 1: Localisation Supply Chain

STAR Shows the Way to

AutomationImagine completing a

single project and

you never have to

repeat doing it again.

Imagine the process

and technology you

might require.

Having the right

problem solving and

technical skills would

be all you need.

Now imagine doing

200 projects a year!

STAR automated

solutions can help,

says DAMIAN

SCATTERGOOD

Damian Scattergood Fig. 2: Localisation process touch points

MARCH 2003 COMPANY.close-up 7LOCALISATION FOCUS

sider the entire span of your localisation

process, from producer to vendor to trans-

lator and back again.

A Paradigm Shift

STAR Technology Solutions proposes a

localisation process paradigm shift from an

engineering-driven process to an automa-

tion-driven process.

STAR Proactive™ implements this par-

adigm shift. With the current engineering-

driven paradigm an engineer instructs a

software tool to perform a number of

process steps and the engineer implements

any remaining steps manually. With the

automation-driven process the software

tool is automatically instructed to per-

form process steps and the engineer is

instructed to perform any remaining

steps manually. The paradigm shift

from an engineering-driven process to

an automation-driven process improves

the efficiency of the localisation

process. Automation deals with the

repeatable laborious tasks. Your engi-

neering teams focus on the value-

adding activities in your process.

This improved efficiency is realised

as improvements in consistency, time-

to-market, quality and reduced costs.

Our work to date in this area shows

that we see a 60% internal / 40% exter-

nal spend split between internal local-

isation costs and external translation

costs. Based on experience of imple-

menting this paradigm shift, the 60% inter-

nal costs were reduced to 15%, resulting in

an overall cost savings of 45%. STAR

Proactive™ can deliver this cost saving.

STAR Proactive™ also drives the

Alchemy Catalyst server edition for software

translations. Alchemy has seen this combi-

nation of technologies reduce the number

of manual transactions in its localisation

process by some 79%.

Seventy-nine percent reduction in man-

ual transactions can be achieved with

workflow automation. (Source: Alchemy

Software 2003)

Translation versus Transaction Costs.

Traditionally, the focus on cost reductions

has been on the pure translation cost. This

downward price pressure was mainly

directed at the translation vendors and trans-

lators. However, this is only a small part of

your complete localisation supply chain. In

fact, this accounts for approximately only

28% of the complete localisation supply

chain spend. (Source: Damian Scattergood,

Presentation LRC 2002)

The real cost savings come from reduc-

ing the costs across your entire process –

Producer -> Vendor -> translator model

(See Fig. 3).

When we look at the touch points and

how often files are manually handled this

creates a very costly process. Every time a

file is touched in your process, you pay for

that transaction, even if it is not handled

directly by your employee. By automating

these tasks you reduce the transactional costs

of your localisation process.

From a technology standpoint Transla-

tion Memory Tools assist in driving down

the translation costs but automated work-

flow tools reduce your transaction costs.

Once these transactional costs are

addressed through automation, then you

gain from the economies of scale as your

organisation grows. It costs just as much to

transact 10,000 tasks as it costs to do 100.

You are now empowered for consistent

exponential growth.

Again and Again - Consistently

The benefit this scalability brings to your

organisation is the consistency in your

process. Once it is done right it will always

be done right. A project completed 6 weeks,

months or even years ago can be updated

at minimal costs.

Consistency brings a higher cost saving

in terms of reduced expenditure on qual-

ity and testing. The focus of most quality

assurance processes is to ensure that ele-

ments of a project are not broken. Each

time a product is updated this costly task

is traditionally repeated again. Repeating

your testing in this manner maintains a

direct relationship between the number of

builds and quality testing performed. As

stated previously, wherever there is a direct

relationship in your process between any

two tasks, you will pay the full costs for

growth. Automated workflow systems

allow you to break this one to one rela-

tionship. The more consistent the process,

the less bugs are introduced and the less

re-work and testing are required. Expo-

nential quality improvements are achieved.

STAR Proactive™ Automation delivers

consistency and repeatability; improved

quality and reduced testing time.

Where is the real cost of your translation?

Before implementation of an automation

strategy you should ask: How many words

did you translate last year? What is the fully

loaded cost per word? What is the transla-

tion cost per word?

Based on the answer to these questions,

can you measure where the real cost is?

The difference between the fully loaded

cost and the translation cost is the overhead

of running your business. The key question

to ask is why is the gap so big?

The reason is transaction costs, purchase

order management and invoicing, quality

assurance and testing, engineering, file

rework and project management overhead.

Automated workflow solutions reduce

the transaction costs, benefiting you with

the ability to grow exponentially

with minimal additional operat-

ing costs.

STAR Proactive™ and Automated Localisation.

STAR Proactive™ offers a com-

plete solution for project automa-

tion localisation and translation

management. Each of the STAR

Proactive™ modules interacts

through a web services interface

to automate the end-to-end local-

isation process.

Files are automatically trans-

ferred from producer to vendor to

the translator, thus eliminating the

many manual hand-off processes

in between. The right files are deliv-

ered to the right person at the right

time. Once translation is completed the files

are automatically passed back along the sup-

ply chain to the producer for shipping.

Powerful Localisation Tools

STAR Proactive™ is fully integrated with

the best of breed industry tools such as

STAR Transit XV and TermStar to provide

the highest quality translation memory and

localisation systems.

Integration with Alchemy Catalyst is

available to fully automate the software

localisation process. The Catalyst Automa-

tion Server delivers full automation of the

leading file formats, including .NET, .XML,

.DLLs, and over 60 additional file formats.

With STAR Proactive™, a single project

manager can administer and track the

whole localisation process while keeping

the key elements of time, cost and quality

under control.

The benefits brought by automated work-

flow solutions to businesses are many. They

deliver consistent results and increase pro-

ductivity and time to market. Now..

Ready for the next great quarter! ■

For further information on the STARgroup and its range of products contactDamian Scattergood, STAR Technology Solu-tions, Docklands Innovation Park, 128-130East Wall Road, Dublin 3, Ireland, Email:[email protected], Phone:353-1-2401306, www.star-ts.com

Fig. 3: Cost saving model

LABORATORY.loc MARCH 20038 LOCALISATION FOCUS

As announced in the last issue of Local-isation Focus, now you have at your

fingertips the possibility of fully access-

ing a repository of the most relevant

localisation tools used in the industry.

Because it might not be viable for all individ-

uals to travel to the LOTS laboratory (which is

situated in the University of Limerick and run by

the LRC), remote access will offer an interesting

alternative.

The technology behind this service is Microsoft

Windows 2000 Server and Terminal Services

Current status

Before providing general access to users, the

LOTS technical team is now seeking localisation

professionals who would like to test and provide

feedback on the LOTS remote service. Once full

beta testing has been carried out, general users will

have access to the LOTS server remotely by logging

on from anywhere in the world.

How to access the LOTS server

In order to gain remote

access to the LOTS server,

users will need to request a

personal user name and

password from the LOTS

staff. Then, they will be able

to log on to the LOTS server

through the ELECT web

portal, as shown in Figs.1

and 2 below.

As shown in Fig. 2, once

logged onto the LOTS

server, users will

have access to a

p e r s o n a l i s e d

LOTS desktop

containing sample files, in exactly the

same way as if they were sitting phys-

ically in front of one of the computers

in the LOTS laboratory.

With remote access, some restrictions

will be applied to each user, which will

prevent users employing the technol-

ogy offered by LOTS in a production

environment.

More detailed information including

guidelines and a policy for use is available

in the LOTS Technology section on

www.electonline.org

Technical rquirements

ADSL connection; Pentium III, 1Ghz

processor; Windows 2000 or XP Pro O/S,

Internet Explorer v.6.

Contact us

If you have not been contacted yet and

would like to contribute, make a sugges-

tion, or just get some additional infor-

mation, please contact: The Localisation

Research Centre (LRC). Tel: +353 (0) 61

202881, Fax: +353 (0) 61 202734. Email:

[email protected]. Website: www.localisation.ie

LOTS has been established by the LRCat the University of Limerick as part of theEuropean Union-funded ELECT project,The European Localisation Exchange Cen-tre. ELECT is coordinated by the LRCwith Bowne Global Solutions, Germany,as a partner. ELECT is funded under theEU’s eContent programme.

RWSGroup

WebBudget

LOTSContributors

Rafael Guzmán is thecoordinator of the LRCLocalisation Technology

Laboratory andShowcase (LOTS). He

can be reached [email protected].

The Localisation Technology Laboratory and Showcase … generating LOTS of interest.

LOTS Remote

Fig. 1: The remote connection to the LOTS server is made through the ELECT web portal at: www.electonline.org

Fig. 2: Localisation tools such as Catalyst 4.03 can run and be tested remotely on the LOTS server.

MARCH 2003 LOCALISATION.central 9LOCALISATION FOCUS

LOCALISATION.centralThe inside information on localisation

10Using Web Services with Translation Memory SystemsPhilippe Mercier

12Translation is Not EnoughAlvin Yeo

15Sex, Wolves and ElvisHans Fenstermacher

17It’s Business As UsualGarry Levitt

18Smarter Process, Better ServiceReinhard Schäler

Sleepless In Localisation?Shailendra Musale

19

SDLInsight 2003 ReviewRafael Guzmán

22

Readers’ Forum24

CENTRAL TO THIS ISSUE

WEBservices for localisation and translation services, cul-tural issues in localisation and the long-overdue trans-

formation of the industry are three of the central themes in this issue.Philippe Mercier, following up on previous articles by Bill Looby

and Jaap van der Meer, outlines how translation memory (TM) sys-tems can serve TMs over the web and Reinhard Schäler introducesthe new OASIS Technical Committee on Translation Web Services.

Alvin Yeo bases his observations around cultural adaptationon Hofstede’s work about cultures and organisations and HansFenstermacher proposes to create our own localisation PR mon-ster in Sex, Wolves and Elvis. Garry Levitt talks about focusingon the effects recent changes in the industry have had on exist-ing and potential clients.

Rafael Guzmán also reviews the latest version of SDLInsight andShailendra Musale gives us tips on how to avoid sleepless nightsover looming project deadlines. Readers’ opinions to last issuesproposition in the Readers’ Forum section rounds up this issue’sLocalisation Central.

Finally, we have two important announcements for anyone involvedin localisation research and development.

Reinhard Schäler

CCaallll ffoorr PPaappeerrssThe International Journal of Localisation, a new, annual, peer-

reviewed journal published by the Localisation Research Centre(LRC) at the University of Limerick, Ireland, invites submissionson topics in localisation. Deadline for submission: 01 April 2003.

Further information on www.localisation.ie

IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall LLooccaalliissaattiioonn RReesseeaarrcchh CCoonnffeerreennccee

The First International Localisation Research Conference willtake place on 18 November 2003 in Dublin, Ireland. This eventwill form part of LRC 2003, the 8th Annual InternationalLocalisation Conference, organised by the LRC and supported bya wide range of organisations. Deadline for submission ofpapers: 30 September 2003.

Further information on www.localisation.ie.

LOCALISATION.central MARCH 200310 LOCALISATION FOCUS

Translation memory (TM) sys-tems have been around for awhile and are now part of allprofessional translation pro-cesses. But in this industry,

where translators are working around theglobe for customers or localisation companiesalso located everywhere on the planet, there isstill clearly a need to simplify access to trans-lation memories.

Discussion abounds on how web servicescould help the translation industry. In previousissues of Localisation Focus, Bill Looby of IBMand Jaap van der Meer of Cross LanguageAutomation have discussed the possibilities ofestablishing a standard or a platform that wouldallow for the exchange of business transactionsor link customers and translation vendors.

We would like to take this work one step fur-ther and see if we can try to define standard webservices specifically for accessing translationmemory systems.

Why would we want to do that?

Well, who has not dreamt of a world whereany TM could be accessed from any com-puter in the world wherever it is located? Whohas not dreamt of a world where TM con-version between incompatible TM softwareapplications would no longer be necessary?Of a world where no TM consolidation wouldbe required? Who has never thought of throw-ing the computer out of the window becausethe conversion of a document to translate waswrong and some extra work was needed tofix the problems?

Also, apart from translation memory sys-tems, don’t we have other information systemsrunning in the corporate environment and which

use or maintain translation strings or databasesthat could be reused in other translationprocesses throughout the company? What aboutglobalisation management systems (GMS), con-tent management systems (CMS) or legacy sys-tems? CMS’s, for example, are designed tomanage large websites, which tend to be mul-tilingual most of the time. In some cases, thetranslations are stored internally by those veryCMS systems, perhaps within a proprietary kindof TM system. The same can be said for GMSsystems. Could that repository of professionaltranslations be used in some way?

And what about the different depart-ments or subsidiaries of a corpora-tion? Do they each have differentsystems and different solutionsfor handling translations?

Finally, we must think aboutmachine translation systems(MT). One might contest thatthese systems are not goodenough for professionaltranslations. True. Yetthey could be of greathelp for translators.The quality ofmachine translationsystems like SYSTRAN has improved tremen-dously over the past few years. Those systems,if fine-tuned with customised terminology, canbe extremely efficient and yield translations thatcan be reviewed by professional translators whoedit for accuracy andquality control.

We see that besidestranslation memories,many other “transla-tion systems” or sys-tems able to providetranslations are indeedavailable; however,we cannot use thembecause each softwareapplication has itsown format to storethe data and there isno common userinterface. There is of course the option toexport and exchange the data between soft-ware applications but again this requires agreat deal of extra manipulation, which weclearly want to avoid.

If we could integrate those other systemsinto the translation flow, might we be able toimprove quality, lower prices and reduce

time-to-market all at the same time? This isclearly the challenge facing translation man-agers today (See Fig. 1). Unfortunately, theserequirements end up conflicting with oneanother. Most often, the translation manageris locked into picking only two of them.Below we will see how to maximise trans-lation capital by connecting those systemscurrently not in use and which are not partof one unified translation solution.

Web services allow us to meet all threeobjectives.

What do we want to achieve?

What most companies have available to themtoday are different types of computer systemsrunning different kinds of software applicationsthat could provide translations. These applica-tions have not been developed to be usedremotely. They are incompatible.

On the other end, there are translators whowould ideally like to have access to those trans-lations using one single tool-without the needto exchange, convert, export or import data.

On the surface, it seems fairly complicatedto integrate the incompatible systems,

resources and data located at differentplaces into a single, simple and

streamlined translation flow. Do weactually need to establish a con-

nection protocol between eachtranslator and each system?

Clearly, the answer is no.Nobody wants to build

such a complex system(See Fig. 2).

Therefore we needto ask ourselves, if thisproblem has not yetbeen solved, is the

solution still not available?Well, we are all familiar with websites. If

we have a close look at the technology usedfor websites, we can see that communicationbetween websites and client computers is

very similar to whatwe want to achieve.

To run a website, weneed a piece of soft-ware called a webserver. There are sev-eral web servers avail-able on the market,some run under Unix,some run underMicrosoft Windows,etc. Some are “static”and the pages arealways the same whileothers are “dynamic”

and generate their pages on the fly by gettinginformation from a database.

But, from the client perspective, every usercan access the website information from any-where in the world by using any kind of com-puter using different software (Netscape,Internet Explorer, etc.) and running on dif-ferent operating systems.

Using Web Serviceswith Translation

Memory SystemsIn this industry, where translators

are working for customers or

localisation companies located

everywhere on the planet, there

is a need to

simplify access

to translation

memories says

PHILIPPE

MERCIER

Fig. 2: The system we don’t want

Fig. 1: Meeting these three requirements is a chal-lenge that translation managers face today


For example, the CNN website is runningunder the UNIX operating system and theUSA Today website under the Windowsoperating system but any user browsing froma Mac or a PC will be able to navigate bothsites with ease (See Fig. 3).

What are web services?

The technology used for accessing websitesis very similar to the one we need to accesstranslation memories remotely. Instead of send-ing out formatted web pages with text andgraphics as websites do, raw data could be sent.

The basic idea behind web services is sim-ple: to allow the client and the server toexchange any kind of data, not only web pages.They allow completely incompatible systemsto be connected together, and systems to bebuilt with a real open architecture. The clientand the server need to speak a common lan-guage (SOAP for example), providing theclient with the ability to pack any kind of com-mands and the server to reply with the requireddata. These are the services or functions definedby the server that the client can call up. Theseare the functions that need to be standardisedfor all translation memories or more generallyfor all translation tools.

The four basic standard functions neededfor accessing any kind of TM are extremelysimple:

OpenTm — Will open the translationmemory.

GetTranslation — Will search in thetranslation memory for a potential transla-tion and will propose it to the translator.

UpdateTranslation — Will record a trans-lation accepted by the translator into thetranslation memory.

CloseTM — Will close the TM once thework is finished

Of course other functions such as CreateTMmight be required but we could already be run-ning a translation memory system remotely withjust these four functions!

If we come back to the diagram showing theflow between a standard website and clientcomputers, we see that all we need is to installthe TM software applications or any softwareproviding translations on the web server side.We want to insist on the fact that the transla-tion memory software application is not run-

ning on the translator’s computer anymore (andthat’s a major improvement). On the client side,the translation can then be read by means ofany other component capable of understand-ing the data protocol (SOAP). This componentcan be linked to another application such as a

word processor interface. We can thus connect the web service to

an interface such as MS-Word, for example,which translators are very adept at andknow well (See Fig. 4).

Will that change the way transla-tion projects are handled today?

Yes it will. Instead of sendingtranslation memories over the Inter-net, then asking the translators towork locally, and finally requestingthem to send the TM back to con-solidate them, companies will merelyinstall the TMs on a computer acces-sible through the Internet.

They will simply give access tothe memory when they want to start

a translation project, and restrict it whenthe project is finished. The translatorswill be working online, getting informa-tion online, saving their translations online, andtheir work will be immediately available foruse by other translators. The good thing is thattranslators will still be using a translation mem-ory interface like the one they use today butthey will be able to concentrate on the transla-tion work itself and will be spared from the taskof manipulating translation memory files.

Asoftware application like T-Remote Mem-ory, which is currently the only one imple-menting this technology, provides a very familiarMS-Word interface that remains the same nomatter what kind of translation system the trans-lators are connected to (translation memory,CMS, machine translation - MT, etc.).

This introduces a very important advan-tage: once an organisation has opted for acertain user interface, the back office’s TMsystems can be modified or upgraded with-out changing the client interface. This elim-inates significant training costs generated byimplementing a new client interface. Like-wise it avoids stressing the translators by ask-ing them to learn yet another new system.

However, should the corporate client wishto change the client interface, T-Remote Mem-ory can readily accommodate. We can imagine,for example, a scenario where TRADOS’s TagEditor could easily be adapted to call up thestandard web services, allowing this softwareapplication to receive translations from the sys-tem. Another translator might prefer the MSWord interface, and could still use it.

The only restriction is that the different clientsoftware interfaces must all use the same seg-mentation algorithm. Otherwise, a 100% matchfor one client software might only yield an 80%match for another client software.

The future of web services

Without going too much into the techni-cal details, we can say that the data

exchanged between the server and the clientuses the xml standards. This is one of the keyinnovations of web services.

Web services can also be integrated seam-lessly into any existing corporate infrastructure,and the new extended system will work throughexisting proxies and firewalls since web ser-vices use standard web protocols (http, xml,soap...). Furthermore, the data can be encrypted

using the same mechanism as currently donefor secure websites.

Another advantage of using this web servertechnology is that it allows one to have manyusers simultaneously connected to the transla-tion system. Virtually it could handle hundredsor thousands of users in exactly the same wayas this web technology allows hundreds or thou-sands of visitors to navigate a normal website.

The conclusion is simple: if a system can bequeried for translations, it is only a short step tointegrating web services and connecting it to acentral system.

It can then be part of a modular systemlike T-Remote Memory, built with incom-patible pieces of existing software applica-tions that can be expanded, modified andupgraded easily in the future. This technol-ogy already exists, and is no longer a dreamor vision of the future. It is available, andclearly the way to go for the open, scalablearchitecture that the industry needs. ■

Philippe Mercier has an extensive back-ground in software engineering. The author of10 computer programming books, published inFrance by Marabout (Hachette group), Mr.Mercier has nearly 10 years of experience inthe localisation industry where he has used hisengineering skills to develop tools, processesand infrastructures particular to the translationand software localisation industries. Joining theTelelingua group in 1997, Mr. Mercier is nowthe Managing Director of Telelingua SoftwareSA, the software branch that Telelingua createdin partnership with the Catholic University ofLouvain. Before working for Telelingua,Mr.Mercier was project manager for MendezTranslations, a market-leading translation com-pany. Mr.Mercier began his career as a soft-ware engineering consultant. He can be reachedat [email protected].

Fig. 4: The web services are connected to the MS-Wordinterface which receives the translations.

Fig. 3: CNN and USA Today websites can be viewed on multiple platforms


It is generally acknowledged that

most of today’s localisation is pre-

dominantly focussed on translation

of the language people use to interact

with computing systems. This focus

is evident from the articles in the September

and July issues of Localisation Focus, as well

as the numerous books and articles on inter-

nationalisation and localisation cited in

Uren (1998). However, as claimed by

authors such as Nielsen (1990), transla-

tion may not be sufficient.

Nielsen (1990) provides an example that

supports his assertion: LYRE, a French

hypertext system for teaching poetry,

allows students to see the poem from var-

ious viewpoints. LYRE allows the teacher,

but not the students, to add new view-

points. This design is acceptable to South-

ern European tradition. An alternative

design allowing students to make changes

is unacceptable, as this design would be

seen to undermine the teacher’s authority.

However, Nielsen states that people in

Denmark, where Scandinavian attitudes

are prevalent, would not accept the cur-

rent design of LYRE as the system limits

the students’ potential for independent dis-

covery. For LYRE to be acceptable, in addi-

tion to translation, the system should be

modified in such a way that that the teach-

ers can decide whether to allow student’s

viewpoints to be added. Localisation of

LYRE for the Scandinavian market would

require the system to accept students’ view-

points of the poem; localisation for the

Southern European market would not. (Ide-

ally this modification would be addressed at

the design phase of software development life-

cycle, that is, in an internationalisation

process.) From this example, the translation

of the language that users employ to interact

with the system is not sufficient. A “deeper”

level of culture needs to be addressed. How-

ever, before we pursue such a discussion, it is

appropriate at this point to define culture.

Culture and cultural groups

The term “culture” is defined as learnt

behaviour comprising thoughts, feelings and

actions (Hoft, 1996). This learnt behaviour

distinguishes the members of one group of

people from another (Hofstede, 1994). This

group, henceforth known as a cultural group,

consists of people who share the same culture,

that is, they think, feel and act in a similar

manner. Cultural groups are defined by fac-

tors such as nationality, geographical location,

or ethnic groups. Cultural groups can also be

defined by occupations, the organisations peo-

ple work in, or the expertise/roles of people

in work settings. As such, a person may

belong to numerous cultural groups. For

example, Ariunaa is a Mongolian who works

as an architect in Mongolia. In this case, she

is a member of at least two cultural groups,

that of Mongolians, and of architects. She

would most likely know and understand the

rituals and norms of Mongolians. However,

she would also possess knowledge about archi-

tecture; knowledge she shares with architects

all over the world.

Cultural differences

Irrespective of how a cultural group is

defined, the cultural differences between

groups can be categorised into symbols, heroes,

rituals, and values. These categories are also

called manifestations of culture (see Table 1,

Hofstede, 1994). These categories can be con-

sidered as layers of culture, much like, skins

of an onion (see Fig. 1). The symbols layer is

the most superficial. “Peeling” the symbols

layer will reveal, heroes and so on (Hofstede,

1994). The outer layer would be the most vis-

ible or overt, and values layer the most hid-

den. All symbols, heroes, and rituals layers

are included under the term “practices.” As

such, outsiders can see these practices. How-

ever, the cultural meanings of these practices

are invisible to the outsiders (Hofstede, 1994).

Cultures: From Symbols to Values

Translation is Not Enough

The translation of the

language that users employ

to interact with computer

systems is not sufficient.

A “deeper” level of culture

needs to be addressed.

ALVIN YEO explains

Alvin Yeo

SYMBOLS include words, gestures, pictures and

objects that carry a particular meaning,

which is only recognised by those who share

the same culture.

HEROES are persons, alive or dead, real or imag-

inary, who possess characteristics which are

highly prized in a culture, and who serve as

models for behaviour.

RITUALS are collective activities, technically

superfluous in reaching desired ends, but

which, within a culture, are considered as

socially essential, for example, ways of greet-

ings.

VALUES are broad tendencies to prefer certain

states of affairs over others. Values have a

plus and a minus side. For example, evil vs.

good, dirty vs. clean, ugly vs. beautiful.

Norms are the standards for values that exist

within a group or category of people ...

norms pertain to what is ethically right.

Table 1: Hofstede’s (1994) definitions of cultural manifestations


Cultural differences and cultural groups

In relating the cultural group to the cul-

tural manifestations, every member of a

cultural group would possess recognisably

similar attitudes and behaviours, as well

as think and act in recognisably similar

ways given the same situations. Further-

more, members of a cultural group are

likely to perceive an artefact as having the

same significance. However, members of

a different cultural group may not perceive

the artefact as having the same significance.

Using an example from the symbols layer,

an Algerian would understand a sen-

tence in Arabic, as would most other

Algerians. However, a Thai, who

most probably has not learnt

Arabic, would not understand

the same Arabic sentence.

The Algerian has learnt the

meanings assigned to the

Arabic words, and he

would know what the

combination of Arabic

characters mean. The Thai

would not understand or

recognise the Arabic sen-

tence, as most Thais have

never learnt Arabic. Thus,

the perception of members of

one cultural group literate in

Arabic, would not be the same

as compared to the perception of

members of another cultural group,

who do not know Arabic.

While the Algerian and LYRE examples

above depict cultures associated with

nations, cultural groups can be "cate-

gorised" differently as illustrated by the

following example from Bødker and Ped-

ersen (1991). Bødker and Pedersen

describe a pump-valve which sits on a

pedestal behind glass – like a precious

ornament – in the lobby of a company.

The valve was the first pump-valve from

the company’s new supplier. To the mem-

bers of the workplace, the valve symbol-

ised "autonomy and independence".

A newcomer to the company would prob-

ably assume that the pump-valve was impor-

tant because it was the first component

manufactured in the company. Just like the

Mongolian architect example, this example

also illustrates that cultural groups need not

necessarily be associated with nations.

Localisation: from symbols to values

Using the onion model, today much work

has been focussed at the symbol’s layer – the

layer that is the most conspicuous to an

observer. This layer includes languages, for-

mats of numbers, date and time, colours,

images, sounds and product names.

On the other hand, the LYRE exam-

ple illustrates an example focussing on

the deeper layers of culture. The behav-

iour of the two groups of people, South-

ern Europeans and Scandinavians can

be explained by power distance. Power

distance is defined as "the extent to

which the less powerful members of

institutions and organisations within a

country expect and accept that power is

distributed unequally." (Hofstede,

1994). Hofstede studied the work val-

ues of more than 100,000 employees,

worldwide, of a multinational organi-

sation. From the study, he identified 50

countries and three regions in a contin-

uum – countries with high power dis-

tance (such as Malaysia ranked 1) to

countries with low power distance (such

as Austria, ranked 53). Southern Euro-

pean countries appear to be those with

greater power distance than Scandina-

vian countries – France (origin of the

system) is ranked 15/16, Portugal 24/25,

Spain 31, Italy 34, whereas Scandina-

vian countries, Finland is ranked 46,

Norway 47/48, Sweden 47/48, and Den-

mark 51 (See Table 2).

According to Hofstede (1994), teachers

in higher power distance countries (such as

Southern European countries) are expected

to take all initiatives in class, the teachers

are gurus who transfer personal wisdom,

and the students treat teachers with respect.

In the lower power distance countries

(such as Scandinavian countries),

teachers expect initiatives from stu-

dents in class, the teachers are

experts who transfer impersonal

truths, and the students treat

teachers as equals.

These behaviour patterns

concur with observations

made by Nielsen (1990). In

the LYRE example, only

Southern European teach-

ers should be able to add

their perspectives of the

poems – teachers take all the

initiatives. In Scandinavia,

teachers prefer students to

explore the software, in which

students are supposed to take the

initiative. (It must be noted that

the above culture/behavioural pat-

terns do not correspond to all teachers

in Southern Europe, but that those behav-

iours are general/collective tendencies of

the whole population in relation to ten-

dencies of populations in another region,

say, in Scandinavia.)

The LYRE example illustrates that

localisation has to go beyond the symbols

layer, and into deeper layers such as val-

ues. While much work has been done at

the symbols layer, even more work may

have to be conducted in the value layers.

Fig. 1: Layers of manifestations of culture (sourced from Hofstede (1994))

Bødker, K, and Pedersen, J. S. (1991).Workplace Cultures: Looking at Artifacts,Symbols and Practices. In Greenbaum, K.and Kyng, M. (eds). Design at Work:Cooperative Design of Computer Systems.Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p121-136.

Fernandes, T. (1995). Global Inter-face Design. Chestnut Hill, USA: AP Pro-fessional.

Hofstede, G. (1994). Cultures and Orga-nizations: Software of the Mind. PaperbackEdition. London, UK: HarperCollins.

Hoft, N. (1996). Developing a CulturalModel. In Del Galdo, E. and Nielsen, J.(Eds.). International User Interfaces. NewYork, USA: John Wiley and Sons. p41-73.

Nielsen J. (1990b). Usability Testing ofInternational Interfaces. In Nielsen, J. (Ed.).

Designing UserInterfaces for InternationalUse. New York, USA: Elsevier. p39-44.

Schäler, R. (2002). The CulturalDimension in Software Localisation.Localisation Focus: The InternationalJournal for Localisation. September2002. p21-23.

Trompenaars, F. (1993). Riding theWaves of Culture: Understanding Cul-tural Diversity in Business. London:Nicholas Brealey.

Victor, D. (1992). International Busi-ness Communication. New York:Harper Collins.

Yeo, A. W. (2002). Exploring Usabil-ity Evaluation of Localised Software inMalaysia. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Uni-versity of Waikato, New Zealand.

REFERENCES


According to Hoft (1996), the Iceberg

model provides a useful metaphor to

describe the layers of culture. An anal-

ogy is drawn in comparing the layers of

culture with an iceberg. In an iceberg,

only 10 percent of it is visible – the part

that is above the surface of the water, sim-

ilarly only 10 percent of the cultural char-

acteristics (symbols layer) of a target

audience is visible to an observer. Like-

wise, the remaining 90 per cent of an ice-

berg is under water and not visible, the

remaining 90 percent of cultural charac-

teristics are hidden and are thus easily

ignored, as well as difficult to identify and

study. Nakakoji (1994) pointed out that

deeper cultural issues in software devel-

opment, such as values, were ignored.

Even today deeper cultural issues are still

ignored (Yeo, 2002). While software

applications are available in many lan-

guages, software companies in general

have yet to release software that incor-

porates deeper cultural factors. Software

applications that cater for these deeper

issues are not likely to materialise unless

the large profit-driven software compa-

nies believe it is economically feasible to

do so (Schäler, 2002).

Value-based cultural groupsIdeally, when research and development

is conducted on the deeper layers of cul-

ture, one problem may arise. How would

the target groups be identified? Currently,

given the attention on the symbols layer,

the target cultural groups have largely been

language-based (and associated with coun-

tries). For example, software is available

in Japanese for the Japan market, or in

German for the German or Swiss market.

With deeper layers of culture such as val-

ues, different cultural groups (previously

language-based) may have to be identified.

However, with the focus on values, which

is given priority, language or values? Does

localisation target at specific language

speakers, and then consider the values

(which impacts on how users interact with

the software), or vice-versa? In the locali-

sation of LYRE for Scandinavia, do we

localise the language first, or do we select

the interaction mode first? What impact

does each of these options have on the

design of the software? Which is more prac-

tical? As mentioned earlier, these cultural

groups need not necessarily be associated

with countries, or even values, as there may

be other more important associations.

Irrespective of the priority of the cultural

groups, what is important is that the differ-

ent layers of culture are taken into account

to ensure the most effective human-com-

puter interaction, and, that the design and

implementation of such systems allow effec-

tive and efficient localisation to the respec-

tive target cultural groups. ■

Alvin W. Yeo is a lecturer at the Facultyof Information Technology, UniversitiMalaysia Sarawak. He recently earned hisPhD from the Computer Science Dept., Uni-versity of Waikato, New Zealand and canbe reached at [email protected].

Table 2: Power distance index (PDI) values (sourced from Hofstede (1994))

Acknowledgements

The different view of culture(reported in this article and my PhDthesis) were based on discussions withmy supervisors, Keith Hopper and Dr.Robert Barbour. To them, I owe agreat deal, especially for teaching meto view the world from different per-spectives, and reminding me that everyview is a culturally-biased view!


Global business is being

undermined by tottering

world economies. Govern-

ments are gripped by

political turmoil and

miscommunication. High-tech and

other globally committed companies,

who stand poised to renew their com-

mitment to international commerce, and

who represent the only true possible

solution to economic and cultural pros-

perity, are underserved and frustrated.

Blame Saddam Hussein or Enron, North

Korea or the European Union; the truth

remains that our industry is missing a

precious opportunity. With a world in

crisis over better communication and

integration of global business efficien-

cies, we’ve neglected our roots.

Last year I helped found

GALA (Globalization and

Localization Association)

on the belief that our

industry can, and must,

foster innovative ways

to raise our visibility

and offer our clients

unique, collaborative

value. It started with

15 localisation com-

panies from 12 coun-

tries on 4 continents,

and now some 60

GALA companies are

projecting a joint —

more powerful — voice

within the industry. But is it

loud enough?

Unless companies in our busi-

ness find a way to unite in a collec-

tive cause, to take up the global gauntlet

for localisation, and to champion our

industry’s role in enduringly successful

global business, the answer is a resound-

ing “no.” If we fail, in particular, to

prompt corporate America to do the

same, the question itself will be moot.

We have to get serious. We have to get,

well, sexy.

A recent New Yorker piece by Mal-

colm Gladwell discussed how, histori-

cally, revolutionary thinking has always

come from groups – from people getting

together to explore ideas, argue theories,

elevate intelligence, and broaden knowl-

edge. He argued that we view groups too

simplistically because we divide them

into cults and clubs, dismissing the for-

mer for their insularity, the latter for their

banality. A cult is a place where, cut off

from your peers, you become insane. A

club is a place where, surrounded by

your peers, you become feckless. Yet, by

combining both notions — the right kind

of insularity with the right kind of homo-

geneity — you create an “environment.”

And environments are where great ideas

are possible.

The conclusion bears our attention and

demands our response. There has been no

better time for our industry to con-

solidate its influence, propa-

gate its know-how, and step

up as leaders and world

citizens. Amid global

political and com-

mercial turmoil, now

is the time for local-

isation to leave its

“club,” move into

the environment of

the possible, and

generate a cultural

and institutional

tranformation in

corporate corridors.

We are ambas-

sadors of the highest

kind. A sexy notion,

indeed. We are Corporate

Ambassadors who innately

understand — though it’s notori-

ously difficult to prove — that money

invested in localisation more than vali-

dates its expense. We are Cultural

Ambassadors, driven by the understand-

ing that doing business in the world today

means more than setting up a website.

We are Language Ambassadors, too,

adamant in our conviction that the more

integral localisation is to product devel-

opment, the more market share compa-

nies will gain, and the more profitable

they will become.

Localisation: There’s a whole lotta shakin’ goin’ on.

Sex, Wolves and Elvis

Amid global political

and commercial tur-

moil, now is the time

for localisation to

leave its “club,” move

into the environment

of the possible, and

generate a cultural

and institutional

transformation in

corporate corridors.

GALA co-founder

HANS FENSTERMACHER

issues a call to action.

Hans Fenstermacher

We areCorporate

Ambassadors whoinnately understand —though it’s notoriously

difficult to prove — that money invested in

localisation morethan validates its

expense.


Most great political ambassadors face

challenging environments armed with a

portfolio of knowledge, authority and

credibility. Some, unfortunately, are

ambassadors without portfolio, lacking

the consolidated support and strength so

desperately needed for success. Because

we cannot afford to be the latter, we must

confront our biggest challenges head-on:

corporate machinations that obscure the

value of localisation and our own frag-

mented, confusing localisation industry.

What are some of the internal corpo-

rate challenges? Sales: we must find a way

to elevate the effectiveness of a company’s

sales force by giving them a new unequiv-

ocal arsenal to reach and influence global

markets. Product development: we must

convey the importance of integrating

localisation in the process from the start.

(Internationalisation is finally get-

ting through to engineers, but

what about content creators?)

Purchasing: we must answer

the eternal question,

“How much did you

say?” Information sys-

tems: we must change

processes and incorpo-

rate things like work-

flow automation, content

management, and trans-

lation memory.

Marketing: we must

make sure client market-

ing campaigns, collateral,

and web efforts stay

focused on the right goals —

branding, product image, and

the advantages of localised mes-

saging. Management: we must explain,

prove (and explain again) the influence

properly localised products have on global

marketshare. Did somebody say return

on investment (ROI)?

ROI is the elusive “timber wolf” of the

localisation industry. In the great and widely

approved effort to conserve its population,

we have to prove that it still exists, mea-

sure its numbers, and nurture a supportive

“ecosystem” for it to flourish and procre-

ate. Oh yeah, and keep it from killing the

sheep. There is intrinsic challenge in the

term itself. It’s too trendy. When money-

holding managers hear the term ROI, they

instinctively clutch their wallets. To them,

ROI means “someone wants me to dump

a significant amount of money into some-

thing.” (At Enron that “something” was

far too often an offshore bank account.)

The third-tier accountant who uses the

beleaguered term ROI shoulders the bur-

den of proof of convincing an already skep-

tical management, and perhaps even the

occasional Congressional subcommittee.

Before we can win the ROI battle, we

must deal with the fundamental weak-

nesses of our industry. Localisation, still,

is virtually invisible – a provocative state-

ment for a multi-billion-dollar industry

that theoretically affects every company

on the globe. How can something so obvi-

ously valuable to all of us garner so little

attention outside our circles?

The reality is that localisation is still

confusing and intimidating. Why? In

part because our industry itself wanted

the clients to perceive it that way. If

localisation is complicated and costly,

goes the argument, clients will rely on

us to take care of it for them. Smart

clients aren’t buying that, though, and

have taken many tasks upon themselves

(the jury is still out on the ROI of that

approach, however).

Because our output is basically inscrutable

to our clients, our services have a great deal

of trust and intuition built into them. But

trust can be uncomfortable, as in

those therapy sessions where you

fall anxiously back into the

arms of strangers. Logically,

trust is the opposite of strat-

egy and the antithesis of

business acumen. It’s

impossible to measure,

and usually is not con-

vincing on its own. And

its homely stepsister,

intuition, has a negligi-

ble place in the business

world. If trust and intu-

ition come into play, many

managers argue, it’s prob-

ably because every other

avenue has been exhausted.

The corporate attitude

toward localisation doesn’t help

matters either. It’s rather like the way

the curator of the Museum of Modern Art

might evaluate a velvet painting of Elvis:

with a mixture of condescension and

reluctant acceptance. Trouble is, people

actually like Elvis in velvet; all across

America, he adorns walls behind count-

less vinyl sectionals. All the sighing and

rolling eyes in the world won’t change

that fact. In the same way, people want

to read things in their own language, and

insisting “they all speak English” won’t

change that fact, either.

We can’t afford to keep making the

same mistakes we’ve already committed

as an industry. We’ve promoted our soft-

ware tools and products in the quest for

long-term acceptance and exclusivity.

We’ve made up our own “localisation-

speak” to sound impressive, but we can’t

even agree on it amongst ourselves. We

keep touting our benefits and echoing

warnings about the bleak future that

awaits all companies that fail to see the

importance of localisation. We have

allowed ourselves to be relegated to the

realm of glorified data processors, dis-

counted to the point where our output

is secondary to our cost. Ironically, what

we provide, it turns out, is not very

expensive at all. Common Sense Advi-

sory has reported that our clients are

getting an extremely generous “bang for

the buck ratio.”

How can we effect real change? Let’s

start by changing our persona, debunk-

ing the false notion that all we do is cob-

ble together a network of dubious

data-processors. Let’s take the lead on

our own image, much like the IT profes-

sion that managed to change its portrayal

as Dorito-eating, socially inept geeks to

invaluable, indispensable (and highly

paid) cornerstones of successful corpo-

rations. If we’re a commodity, then let’s

start acting like a hot commodity. Let’s

manage risk, improve processes, craft

credible messages, and guarantee qual-

ity. The UPS (United Parcel Service) peo-

ple are doing this well – painting the

world brown in anticipation.

Let’s create our own PR monster.

Remember Oscar Wilde: “The only thing

worse than being talked about is not being

talked about.” It works for all the right

causes and even many dubious ones. To

do this, we must dispense with the same

stale verbiage that is met with stares, as

Raymond Chandler said, “as shallow and

glazed as the surface veneer of a cafeteria

tray.” (Chandler’s books may rank with

velvet Elvis paintings, but any localisation

company would give its eye-teeth to have

that kind of colloquial power.) We need a

new, illuminating visual and verbal vocab-

ulary that presents a clear, unified message

to global business: Get local or get lost.

We must unite to create (finally!) a

compelling value proposition for our

industry, and glitz it with highly visible

promotions. Global business consumers

need to eat, drink, and sleep localisation

the way they do Burger King, Heineken,

and Hilton. Service and information that

is priceless. Passionate value and return

on investment.

As we move the localisation industry

off the scrap heaps of disassociated ven-

dors to a seat at the global corporate ban-

quet table, as we rise out of basement

bidding wars, let us eliminate compla-

cency and become global leaders.

A few years ago, the “Wall Street Jour-

nal” called localisation the “sexiest”

aspect of the translation business. It’s time

we started living up to it.

Like I said, “There’s a whole lotta’

shakin’ goin’ on.” ■

Hans Fenstermacher is founder andpresident of ArchiText Inc., a U.S. local-isation and globalisation services firm,and founding Chairman of the Board ofthe Globalization and Localization Asso-ciation (GALA). He can be reached [email protected].

Let’s cre-ate our ownPR monster.

Remember OscarWilde: “The onlything worse than

being talked aboutis not being

talked about.”


It is generally claimed that the lan-

guage industry has finally come

of age. Indeed, over the past cou-

ple of years, the countless merg-

ers, acquisitions and takeovers

have been seen by many as a sign that

our line of business has matured from a

cottage industry to more of a full-fledged

industry. This process is seen as a phase

of consolidation that any industry is

likely to go through, as history has

taught us. As is clearly evident to most

people, our industry is in a constant state

of flux. Who doesn’t recall the now

almost immortal words: “Change is the

only constant”? Most recently, Berlitz

GlobalNET was acquired by Bowne

Global Solutions and shortly before that

Alpnet was taken over by SDL

International. Some may see this as part

of the maturing process, but in terms of

maturity, it can be argued that our indus-

try is still merely in its early adolescence.

In trying to assess the effects that these

events will have on our industry, many

people will take the first view and will

hail these recent events as the first sign

that even better things are to come. The

holders of this view include (amongst oth-

ers) global solution providers. They argue

— and maybe rightly so — that consoli-

dation is creating better-equipped solu-

tion providers in language translation and

on the localisation market. As they point

to the greater Return on Investment (ROI)

that companies can achieve through

increased cost savings due to more effi-

cient processes and increased competi-

tion, the signal to many global players is

to “follow the trend, act now and buy

another company.”

However, these events are viewed with

skepticism by, for example, some Single

Language Vendors (SLVs), who warn

against the dangers of an imminent

monopoly situation, which can only be

the result of further takeovers. And they

may have a point. In many ways, we now

already have an oligopoly situation in

which many SLVs are relegated to the

position of mere translation vendors, and

do little testing, DTP and engineering in

comparison with the global players or

Multi Language Vendors (MLVs), who

are further up the value chain. Therefore,

the signal that is going out to this group

is “your existence may be in danger and

you could lose your market share.” And

global players will agree that a situation

in which one company has a virtual

monopoly position regarding service offer-

ings is not conducive to better value or

increased savings.

But instead of worrying too much

about the recent events themselves, we

should consider the signals that are going

out to our existing and potential clients.

The effect that recent events may have on

them is what we should all be focusing

on. Many client companies may be ask-

ing themselves whether their globalisa-

tion partner has the necessary staying

power and what the effect will be on their

global brands and products in the event

of their partner(s) being bought up by

another player. We should be more aware

of the signals that are going out to these

clients, who may be wondering which

horse to back. The fact is that many com-

panies discerned the risks involved in part-

nering with just one globalisation vendor

long ago. Their preferred approach is to

spread the risk by not putting all their

eggs in one basket. Instead, they opt for

a multi-partner approach to product

localisation. Yet even these client com-

panies will have reservations about the

effects of any takeover involving their

globalisation partner. Processes and pro-

cedures may change or may require

redefining. Key contacts may change. The

natural knowledge base that is created

through working with the same staff on

multiple projects may be lost as person-

nel is reshuffled or even laid off. No

takeover, merger or acquisition is ever

seamless.

But in the meantime, life as we know it

continues. For most of us — be it SLV,

MLV or client — tomorrow (and maybe

the day after) will be business as usual.

Constant change is one thing, but as far as

our clients are concerned, we should not

forget our aim of enduring partnership:

surely, the only truly desirable constant. ■

Garry Levitt is a localisation profes-sional, who has lived and studied in theNetherlands, the UK, Belgium, Italy andis now working in Germany. He was firstintroduced to the weird and wonderfulworld of localisation when he attendedthe first Localisation Summer School atthe LRC. Excited by the world of l10n,he now works for a Munich-based local-isation service provider as a LocalisationProject Manager. Garry also holds adegree in Applied Translation Studies fromthe Erasmushogeschool in Brussels and isa Certified Web Globalist. He can bereached at [email protected]

Change may be the only constant, but ...

It’s Business As Usual

No matter how fast

things change, the

effect that recent

events in the

translation business

may have on our

existing and potential

clients is what we

should all be

focusing on,

says GARRY LEVITT.

Garry Levitt


On 17 December 2002, OASIS, the Organization

for the Advancement of Structured Information

Standards, announced the establishment of a

Technical Committee to develop a Web Services

Standard for translation and localisation.

This was the culmination of efforts initiated at the LRC 2001

Conference following a visionary and inspiring presentation deliv-

ered by Bill Looby, Software Architect for Web Globalisation Tech-

nologies at IBM’s Dublin Software Laboratory (see www

.localisation.ie/publications/presentations/2001/Conference/

BillLooby_Lotus.zip). Bill followed his presentation with an arti-

cle in Localisation Focus outlining his vision for translation and

localisation vendor Web services standards (see www.localisation

.ie/publications/locfocus/issues/2002june.pdf).

A group of companies and individuals met over some months

in 2002 to prepare efforts that eventually brought together Dat-

aPower, IBM, the Localisation Research Centre, Microsoft, Ora-

cle, SAP, some individual contributors (among them Jaap van der

Meer and Paul Quigley) and others in a collaboration that will

use Web services as the backbone to a workflow linking the tasks

that comprise a complex software localisation project.

“Any publisher of content requiring translation should be able

to automatically connect to and use the services of any translation

vendor over the Internet without previous direct communication,”

said Peter Reynolds of Bowne Global Solutions and chair of the

OASIS Translation Web Services Technical Committee. “Web ser-

vices hold enormous potential for improving the way localisation

business is conducted, but first the industry must come together to

agree on standards. With the support of many of the largest soft-

ware vendors and localisation experts worldwide, we are confident

that we can build the consensus that’s needed at OASIS.”

The new OASIS Technical Committee will concentrate first

on defining service types that are relevant to the software/con-

tent localisation and translation industry. Their specification

will drive the development of Web Services Definition Lan-

guage (WSDL) documents that will ultimately be published

in a Universal Description and Discover Integration (UDDI)

registry and potentially also in an ebXML registry.

“The core of a localisation Web service is the ability for pub-

lishers to submit content that requires translation, request quotes

or other services from vendors, and for each party to understand

what the other needs. To accomplish this, metadata must be used

that is standardised and publicly available,” explained Rein-

hard Schäler, director of the Localisation Research Centre

(LRC) at Ireland’s University of Limerick and vice chair of

the Technical Committee. “A key objective of the OASIS

Translation Web Services Technical Committee will be to

build the intelligence into the infrastructure by establishing

a set of business process terminology that the software/con-

tent localisation and translation industries will find com-

prehensive and complete.”

The OASIS Translation Web Services Technical Commit-

tee joins another localisation effort at OASIS – one that works

to develop an XML Localisation Interchange File Format

(XLIFF). The two groups plan to coordinate their efforts.

Tony Jewtushenko of Oracle, chair of the OASIS XLIFF

Technical Committee explained the relationship. “The OASIS

Translation Web Services Technical Committee will define

standard interfaces between the disparate actors that work

together in a distributed software localisation process. As

localisable data moves through the localisation actors, XLIFF-

aware tools can be used with minimal imple-

mentation cost. We expect our experience

with XML-based localisation technology will

result in close relations and shared member-

ship with the OASIS Translation Web Ser-

vices Technical Committee.”

“The OASIS Translation Web Services

Technical Committee is a clear example

of how industry players can come together

to jointly develop Web services standards

for their critical business interactions,”

stated Patrick Gannon, president and CEO

of OASIS. “Industries that conduct their

Web services standards development

within OASIS have the opportunity to

interface directly with developers of key

foundational Web services efforts, such as

UDDI, WS-Security, SAML, and more

than 45 others.”

About OASIS (www.oasis-open.org)

OASIS (Organization for the Advance-

ment of Structured Information Stan-

dards) is a not-for-profit, global

consortium that drives the development,

convergence, and adoption of e-business

standards. Members themselves set the

OASIS technical agenda, using a light-

weight, open process expressly designed

to promote industry consensus and unite

disparate efforts. OASIS produces world-

wide standards for security, Web services,

XML conformance, business transactions,

electronic publishing, topic maps and

interoperability within and between mar-

ketplaces. OASIS has more than 600 cor-

porate and individual members in 100

countries around the world.

For information, contact Carol Geyer,

OASIS Director of Communications at

carol.geyer@ oasis-open.org, or by phone

at 978-667-5115, ext. 209. ■

Translation and Localisation Web Services Standards:

Smarter Process, Better Service

OASIS TRANSLATIONWEB SERVICES

COMMITTEE

Peter Reynolds,Bowne Global Solutions,

Chairman

Tony Jewtushenko, OracleCorporation, Secretary

Bill Looby, IBMEditor

Reinhard Schäler,Localisation ResearchCentre, Vice-Chairman

Industry Support for Translation Web Services

“The need for localisation and translation services is readily apparent in today’sglobal economy. As a member of OASIS, DataPower fully supports the work of thenew OASIS Translation Web Services Technical Committee to spearhead standards thatmake automated localisation and translations via XML and Web services a reality,”says Eugene Kuznetsov, founder, President and CTO at DataPower Technology Inc.

“IBM is committed to advancing the Web services architecture and is pleased to par-ticipate in the OASIS Translation Web Services Technical Committee,” said Steve Hol-brook, Program Director, IBM emerging e-business standards. “The ability to describe,publish and find localisation and translation services using open standards will benefitour customers and help accelerate Web services adoption worldwide.”

“SAP’s globalisation, internationalisation, localisation and translation (GILT)activities are key factors to SAP’s success in the marketplace,” said Willi Therre,Senior Vice President, Application Infrastructure for SAP. “We have actively pro-moted GILT-related standards such as Translation Memory eXchange (TMX),Open Lexicon Interchange Format (OLIF), and XML Localisation InterchangeFormat (XLIFF). We are ready to provide substantial input to the new OASISTechnical Committee.”


Wait! This is not a

title of another

Hollywood movie.

It is real and it hap-

pens very often

during localisation projects. Many of us

have probably experienced the common

occurance of sleepless nights due to

looming deadlines with the added pres-

sure of delays in a localisation project.

Resources can often be stretched too far

to complete a project on time with most

projects being delayed and deadlines

being missed. Various factors can be

attributed to causing these delays and

failures in meeting deadlines.

This article attempts to highlight some of

the causes for delays in localisation projects

and tries to offer some tips and hints to min-

imise delays and meet deadlines. Various fac-

tors causing such delays can be broadly

classified into the 3 following categories:

■ Client-Side Factors

■ Vendor-Side Factors

■ Common Factors

CLIENT-SIDE FACTORS

When a client sets a deadline for a

localisation project, a localisa-

tion team on the client-side usually han-

dles the localisation activities. A

localisation coordinator or project man-

ager manages the localisation project

and acts as a single point of contact for

localisation vendors.

Some of the factors that affect client-

side deadlines are as follows:

Project approval

Before starting a project, a localisation

vendor analyses the localisable files using

localisation tools and sends a quotation

to the client.

The client-side localisation coordina-

tor then passes this quotation to the prod-

uct council (usually a group of top-level

managers & directors). Based on the quo-

tation they receive, the product council

decides if they are to take on the project

or not. Usually the product council’s deci-

sion comes late therefore delaying the

process. One way that the client-side

localisation coordinator can speed-up this

process is by constantly following-up with

the product council negotiating new dead-

lines if there is a delay.

Freezing of localisable resources and frequent updates

This process usually involves a devel-

opment team setting a date for the freez-

ing of localisable resources. Many software

development companies use version con-

trol (VC) software that allow developers

to track all changes made to files stored

in a central repository. VC software also

allows any file to be labelled or locked so

that no changes can be made to them.

Developers freeze the localisable files

by locking them as frozen for localisation.

Once these files are locked they are then

given to a localisation team to perform

localisation tasks. However, often the

freezing of localisable files is postponed

as developers sometimes change these files

even after they have been locked.

There are many ways to alleviate this

problem. One way could be to add one

extra step of string review to your local-

isation process. In string review, a docu-

mentation team together with developers

review source strings in order to check

for language style, spelling mistakes or

user-friendliness. Furthermore, arranging

training sessions and briefing develop-

ment teams can increase their awareness

concerning localisation issues. The freez-

ing of localisable files can then be strictly

enforced and the number of updates to

already localised files is reduced.

Responding to queries from agencies and translators

When a localisation agency takes on a

project, they might raise a number of

questions relating to terminology or ambi-

guity in the source text. Sometimes a

screenshot may be needed for reference.

However, these questions are rarely

answered on time. This is a very common

Does deadline anxiety have you ...

Sleepless In Localisation?

Many of us have

experienced sleepless

nights due to looming

deadlines in a

localisation project.

SHAILENDRA MUSALE

offers tips and hints

about how to

minimise delays

and meet deadlines.

Shailendra Musale

complaint made by many translators.

Occasionally, files are missing, for exam-

ple HEADER files, graphic files or files

containing scripts. Such queries are sent

to the localisation coordinator on the

client side. If these queries are not

answered promptly, then it results in

delaying the completion of the project.

The localisation vendor should gather

all queries (rather than sending them in bits

and pieces) and send them to the client with

references to the places where they appear

in the localisable files. The client-side local-

isation coordinator should be able to

answer these queries. However, if he can-

not answer these queries without delay,

then he should forward them to the devel-

opers and try to get answers as soon as pos-

sible as prompt responses to queries from

vendors can save a lot of project time.

Client-validation

Another common issue concerning

translators is that it is difficult to get val-

idated text from a client’s validators as

they are usually busy and translators can-

not press them to speed up the validation

process. After the files have been

localised, they are sent to the client for

validation. The client assigns one person

for the validation of localised files. But

often, validation is not the primary job of

this person. Hence, the validator finds it

difficult to allocate time from their busy

schedule to complete this process. This

means that validated files are sometimes

sent back to the vendor very late and this

can affect the deadline of the project.

Good effective planning is needed on

the client-side. The validator should be

assigned at the beginning of the localisa-

tion project avoiding a situation where

they are assigned at the last minute. They

should also be informed about the pro-

ject schedule and the estimated dates of

when validation tasks will start. This will

give more time to the validator, so that

they can plan their schedule in advance.

Furthermore, localisation coordinators

should check that translators and valida-

tor are working closely together to com-

plete the validation on time.

Poor project planning and scheduling

Often product teams do project plan-

ning as well as setting deadlines for local-

isation projects. Product teams are not

necessarily aware of localisation tasks and

processes. Project schedules can be poorly

prepared on the basis of "gestimates" of

localisation tasks. As a result, deadlines

may not be met and projects can turn into

a nightmare for all involved.

There is no instant solution for this

and proper planning is needed along with

an effort to increase awareness about

localisation in your company. Inviting

members of the localisation team during

project planning can help them to achieve

realistic estimates for localisation tasks.

Also, better communication involving the

localisation team being aware and kept

informed about any changes in the pro-

ject’s milestones can lead to higher pro-

ductivity. Good project planning also

includes keeping a few buffer days in the

project schedule allowing time for unfore-

seen events such as technical problems.

Delays in providing testing materials

Many clients outsource to vendors spe-

cialising in localisation testing. In this case,

clients need to provide the necessary hard-

ware, testing tools and localised builds to

the vendor. If the latest localised builds

are not sent to the vendor on time, this

will affect the testing schedule and thereby

create obstacles in meeting the deadline.

It is the responsibility of the client-side

localisation coordinator to monitor the

localisation testing activities very closely

along with creating a localisation test plan

and preparing a short-version of test spec-

ifications that include only localisation-

related test cases in it. The localisation

coordinator also has to decide the num-

ber of localisation test-rounds and stream-

line the schedule of making localised

builds accordingly along with making sure

that they contain the most updated

localised binary files.

Sending testing materials and hardware

to the vendor well in advance will give

vendors time to become familiarised with

the product. Getting test logs of every

localised build from the vendor also saves

time for correcting any bugs in the

localised files.

VENDOR-SIDE FACTORS

When a deadline is approaching,

localisation vendors can experience

unforeseen problems leading to delays.

However, most of these problems can be

solved through constant follow-ups and

prompt communication. Some vendor-side

factors that affect deadlines are as follows:

Delays in assigning eligible translators

Vendors have databases of adequately

qualified and experienced translators.

Based on project requirements suitable

translators are selected from this database

for assignments. Most of these translators

do translation work as freelance assign-

ments. Hence, it is often difficult to find

eligible translators for the project when

needed. A delay in assigning suitable trans-

lators will delay the translation process.

Vendors should be in touch with the

client regularly and should get details

of any upcoming projects from the

client. Based on project requirements,

the vendor can then plan accordingly

and book any translators in advance.

This will also help freelance translators

to schedule their translation assignments.

Technical problems and DTP

Processing files using localisation tools

is not always trouble-free. Often vendors

are faced with technical problems. Some

of these problems are due to file formats,

templates and styles used in the document

or version incompatibility. Formatting

localised documents always consumes a

lot of time. Tasks like creating index

entries, correcting broken cross-reference

links or graphic layouts need proper atten-

tion and sufficient time is needed to cor-

rect any errors.

While sending project estimates and

quotations to the client, the vendor should

consider all these possible problems and

allow some buffer time in the schedule.

At the time of evaluating files, small demo

translations can be performed, including

DTP work. This will give you some idea

of the intricacies involved in the localisa-

tion project that you will be working on.

Translators located in different time zones

Clients can have special requirements

regarding translators. For example, they

might only want native translators liv-

ing in their country of origin to be used

for a particular project. When working

with remotely located translators, the

time zone can be an important factor.

The time zone can be an advantage or

disadvantage depending on where the

client and translator are located. If you

do not respond to translators' queries

in time or if project files are not sent in

time, then there can be a long waiting

period. This can take up a lot of valu-

able time in the project and can affect

the deadline.

When giving project estimates and quo-

tations, the vendor should consider the

client’s and translator’s time zones in

which they are located and set delivery

dates accordingly. Lining up your trans-

lator’s job properly can help avoid any

unnecessary waiting period even when

working with time zones. Using utilities

or websites that give you world-timings

can help prevent these time delays.

www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/ is a

useful website for this purpose.

COMMON FACTORS

Apart from the factors listed above,

there are also other common factors

in dealing with those deadline delays.

These factors exist on both the client and

vendor-side. Common factors causing

such delays include the following:

Project takeover

On both the client and vendor-side,

project managers handle multiple locali-



sation projects simultaneously. If any pro-

ject manager goes on vacation or a busi-

ness trip, then for that period of time a

substitute project manager will look after

the project. Such project "takeovers" take

place regularly. If project "takeovers" are

not executed properly and if the correct

project information is not given to the

substitute project manager, then this can

lead to miscommunication and delays in

project deliveries.

Maintaining a project diary for each

localisation project with all-important

details regularly recorded in it can be use-

ful during project takeovers as all relevant

project information is easily accessible.

In the project takeover process, both

outgoing and incoming project managers

should make sure that the takeover process

is done properly and that the transition is

smooth. If there are any client-specific tools

or software, then the outgoing project

manager should give some training to the

substitute project manager. Often, vaca-

tions and business trips are planned well

in advance hence vendors can prepare for

a project takeover without causing any

delays. This is crucial for the successful

completion of the localisation project.

Public holidays

Vendors and clients might be located

in different countries. Each country can

have different public holidays. Some hol-

idays are international such as 1st May

(International Labour Day) or 1st Janu-

ary (New Years Day). These public holi-

days can have some effect on the project

schedule therefore during project plan-

ning, both parties should consider public

holidays in their own respective countries

and should set the project milestones and

deadlines accordingly.

Internet and FTP connectivity problems

Internet connections may not always be

reliable. Often servers are down for repairs

or regular maintenance work. Accessing

FTP servers is also not always easy. There

can be frequent delays in downloading and

uploading files. In some countries, due to

electricity shortages, there is sometimes no

electricity available. During these times,

when servers are down and Internet con-

nections are not working, valuable days

can be wasted having an overall impact

on the project schedule.

Allowing some buffer time can help to

control problems such as these. Creating

mirror FTP sites and performing server

maintenance after office hours or during

weekends can also prevent serious delays

in the project schedule.

Lack of timely information

There might be some unexpected

changes in the files to be localised or the

client may make last minute changes to

project requirements. Due to these changes

in requirements, localisable files are often

updated many times during a single local-

isation project. Clients may even put a

temporary hold on a project. On the ven-

dor-side, there might be some internal fac-

tors causing delays in deliveries.

Prompt communication is crucial and

clients should inform the vendor imme-

diately about any changes in the project

plan or milestones. Exchanging the latest

status updates between all parties involved

is essential to the success of a project.

Administrative processes

Some project initiation requires the

signing of legal documents such as Non-

Disclosure Agreements (NDAs), confi-

dentiality agreements and insiders'

agreements. Legal counsel from both

parties may review such legal docu-

ments. This may take some time but pro-

ject files cannot be handed over to the

vendor unless legal formalities have been

completed. One solution to this prob-

lem might be to sign a one time NDAs

with vendors.

THERE IS LIFE AFTER THE DEADLINE

Tension arising from deadlines can

be reduced with proper planning

from all parties involved. Meeting a

deadline and completing a localisation

project successfully requires cooperation

and efforts from both clients and ven-

dors. Cooperation amongst all parties

is essential when trying to stay within

these deadlines!

Proper and effective communication

is very important for the success of any

localisation project. Although there is no

magic formula for effective communica-

tion, the table above, based on an RASCI

chart that was presented at the LRC

Summer School 2002 at the University

of Limerick, Ireland, may help you beat

those deadlines! ■

Shailendra Musale is a Senior Locali-sation Coordinator with F-Secure Cor-poration, Finland. At F-Secure, hemanages localisation projects for hand-held devices. Shailendra can be contactedat [email protected]

DevelopmentTeam

R

R

I, C

I

C

I

Translators

I

I

I

III

I

DTP Specialists

I

I

I

III

I

Technical orIT Team

C, S

A, S, C

I

Validators/Reviewers

I

I

I

II

I

I

Tasks/Roles

Project approval and information about upcoming project

Freezing of localisable resources

Changes to localisable resources

Queries from agency and translators

Internet and FTP connectivity problems

Project takeover

Public holidays

Client putting project on hold or changes

in project scope

Client’s project review report

Client-Side

R

A, I

I

RR, IR, I

R

R

Vendor-Side

I

A, R

R

RR, IR, I

I

I

Localisation Communication Chart

KEY: R = Responsible • A = To whom "R" is accountable • S = Support • C = Consult • I = To be informed

Localisation project manager


At the time of writing this

article, SDL was about to

release a new version of

SDLX Translation Suite

and SDLInsight, two of the

tools included in the SDLX Localisation

Suite package.

Apart from SDLTermbase (Terminology

Management), and SDLX Autotrans

(Machine Translation), other tools included

in the suite are the well known SDLX Trans-

lation Suite, HTMLQA, HelpQA, and Tool-

Proof (run time validation).

In this article, I will introduce SDLInsight

2003, and then focus on some of its new

features.

About SDLInsight

SDLInsight is a WYSIWYG localisation

environment for Windows software

files. Any file, or part of a file, con-

taining localisable data (menus, dia-

logues, strings, icons, etc) is treated

as an object to be edited in a par-

ticular WYSIWYG object editor.

Although the image editor is meant

for simple jobs, you can also use it

to paste back any edited image from

another application.

Inside SDLInsight

Similar to other localisation appli-

cations, SDLInsight creates a .loc pro-

ject file, which allows you to add your

files, at any stage, for localisation sta-

tistics reports and QA analysis.

Project managers can easily gen-

erate statistical information to be

displayed on the screen or exported

to a .html file. At the project level,

the total number of words and per-

centage translated for each object

type (i.e. menus, dialogues, strings,

etc) is displayed in a table, and the

complexity of the dialogues and

menus in a different table, accord-

ing to the number of hotkeys (see

Fig. 1). Of course, more detailed

reports can also be generated, but

information on each file and object

is broken down into different

screens as you browse through the

html report document.

Other standard localisation features such

as pseudo translation, glossary export, lever-

aging, etc., are also available. The QA check

options (truncations, overlapping, clashing

hotkeys, empty source text that has been

translated or vice versa) are very helpful as

well, and it can be applied just to the source

(before localisation) or the target files, or both

(see Fig. 2).

What’s new

Support for .NET executables and

resource scripts: One of the enhancements

of this version of SDLInsight is the .NET

parsing support. Now .resx files can be

added to a project for localisation as eas-

ily as any other supported file type. Some-

thing to note here is that in its approach,

SDLInsight uses the .NET Framework

New in the SDLX Translation Suite Package is

SDLInsight 2003

SDLInsight 2003,

in combination with

other tools available

in the SDLX localisation

suite covers most of

your localisation needs,

says RAFAEL GUZMÁN

Fig. 2: SDLInsight provides a wide range of QA checks. By click-ing on a reported bug, you are taken to its location to fix it.

Fig. 1: Statistical reports can easily be produced.


Applications Programming Interface

(API), rather than a generic XML parser.

The advantage of this is that SDLInsight

won’t need to be revised in that regard,

as long as you have the relevant version

of the .NET Framework installed on

your machine.

Scripting Functionality: Another inter-

esting new feature is the addition of VB

scripting functionality. This feature is sim-

ilar to the macros in Sax Basic Language

(almost identical to VB) support in Pas-

solo. In SDLInsight, you can customise

the tool to your localisation needs. For

example, you could make it possible to

export custom glossary formats, identify

inconsistent translations, or export your

statistics reports to an .xls file instead of

.html (see Fig. 3.)

The “Binary Chop” wizard: The other

main enhancement is the “Binary Chop”

wizard. This is a solution to the usual

nightmare of having to trial and error

until you find those strings that should-

n’t have been translated and make the

localised application crash. Basically, what

the binary chop does is to help you auto-

mate the tedious process and find the

problem for you.

As shown in Fig. 4, you can select a loca-

tion where to regenerate (i.e. to extract

from the .loc project file to the original for-

mat) your localised file/s. Then the wizard

starts its first 50% string reversion. Then

it regenerates the application files again.

After that, you will be asked whether they

regenerated ok or not. If they didn’t, it will

keep narrowing down the options until the

files regenerate fine. Finally,

it will report all the strings

that could have an error.

Limitations

■ When localising menus, it

is very easy to delete or

change the accelerator com-

bination keys by mistake.

■ Detailed Statistical infor-

mation does not report the

number of resources of each

category (although it is pos-

sible to achieve that by using

the scripting support).

■ It does not support file for-

mats such as xml, html, rtf, or

hpj, etc. However, hpj or rtf

files are supported in SDLX.

■ No parsing or extracting rules cus-

tomisation for text files are

available.

Intended target users

Project Managers, Trans-

lators, and Engineers.

Price

SDLInsight is part of the

SDL Localisation Suite, but

it can also be purchased as

a stand alone tool. Profes-

sional Edition: $1,495;

Translator Edition: $295

(single license).

VerdictOverall, there is an obvious enhanced per-

formance in this new version of SDLInsight,

although there is still room for some

improvements. For example, the addition of

files to a project is still a bit slower than other

similar tools due to the sequel server data-

base system SDLInsight uses, which, on the

other hand, helps to open .loc files faster.

XML and text parsing support are planned

for the next version. As a standalone tool,

SDLInsight does a very good job. In combi-

nation with the other tools in the SDL Local-

isation Suite, a lot of localisation needs are

covered.

For further information, contact SDL

International Ltd. 214-387-8500,

Fax: 214-387-9120. Email: sdlinfo@

sdlintl.com or visit www.sdlintl.com. ■

Rafael Guzmán works in the LRC’sLocalisation Technology Lab. His emailaddress is [email protected]

REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM RECOMMENDED

Operating system Windows

9X, NT, 200, XP Windows 2000

or XP Pro

Processor Pentium® I Pentium® III or higher

RAM 32 MB 128 MB or higher

Disk space 20 MB (to install) —

Screen resolution 800 X 600 1024 X 768

User friendliness

Value for money

Multilingual Support(user interface)

File Support

Overall rating

Excelle

nt

Very G

ood

Good

Satisfa

ctory

Unsatis

factor

y

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

ProductRating

About SDLSDL Desktop Products is an autonomous division of

SDL International focusing on developing and distribut-ing globalisation productivitytools. SDLX Translation Suitewas introduced four years agoand since that time the companyhas added four products to form its SDL LocalisationSuite. With 35 offices worldwide, SDL’s product sales havegrown at 90% per year with products now installed atapproximately 2000 customer accounts.

Fig. 3: The VB scripting capability of SDLInsight allows you to link to other applications.

Fig. 4: The Binary Chop Wizard automates the search of strings that make a localised file crash.

LOCALISATION.central MARCH 200324 LOCALISATION FOCUSLOCALISATION FOCUS

Readers’ F➶rumProcess automation will be the mainlocalisation issue in 2003.

The main challenge will be "targeting",the extraction of translatable text

from its surrounding data, and the subse-quent merging of translations into the orig-inal structure.

In the Internet Age, we see an increasingamount of text stored in databases. This isa natural consequence of the shift to moremassive and dynamic websites, where textfrom multiple content providers converges.Buyers and suppliers of translation servicesmust adjust from a paradigm gearedtoward slow-changing large files to a newworld of smaller translation units thatchange far more rapidly and are less isolat-ed from other system elements than before.

The challenge: each client company willstill have to provide a localisation para-digm to get their translatable text stored inproprietary ways into and out of such stan-dard open-standard formats, in bulk, whileprotecting other non-translatable data.

This paradigm will have to include waysof assigning identifiers to this text, and anotation for expressing which elements totarget for translation, as well as ways ofexpressing integrity constraints that applyto such text. For companies running largecontent-based websites, all these localisa-tion hooks should become critical selectioncriteria when choosing a foundation.Only with them is full localisation processautomation within our reach.

Paul Ghenis has 15 years of experi-ence in i18n and l10n. He is the architectof Blue Martini Software’s L10n Toolkit,which provides roundtrip L10n work-flow automation for e-commerce web-sites built with Blue Martini

Vendors will market better by indicating technologies they are best at

Open localisation standardsare not a solution to the pri-

mary growth opportunities forthe localisation industry today.

Software development is anextremely complex process, andfor the most part it is done ad-hoc. Not only that, but localisa-tion deals with only the outer-most, most visible layers.

As publisher of www.i18n.com, an on-line news source, Iam the target of many customerslooking to find a localisation ven-dor for the first time. What theyare struggling with is how to findone that has processes and inter-nal understanding of their (thepotential customer’s) processesand tools.

Localisation companies havethe opportunity right now to

differentiate themselves by pursuingcompanies that use specific developmenttechnologies. This would interest buyersmore because they are in a better posi-tion to judge if you can meet theirrequired skill levels for managing sourcecode and other files, then they are to tellif one vendor’s Japanese translationcapabilities are different from another.

Vendors will become better marketersby indicating very specific technologiesthey are best at (e.g. Java server pagesand Apache) to targeting the myriad ofcompanies using those techniques whileignoring those who don’t. Focusing onspecific vertical areas will pay off.Industry-specific standards are sec-ondary to those two.

Barry Caplan is the Publisher ofwww.i18n.com, a leading industryonline news source and mailing list. Seehttp://showcase.i18n.com for the firstof many programmes planned toincrease the marketing effectiveness oflocalisation companies.

Open standards can benefit the entire industry

The need for localisation has been feltall over the world primarily to increase

the overseas market, but it is still in itsnascent stages. Current localisationapproaches are very difficult and involveinteraction of machine with different typesof people (translators, linguistics, localisa-

tion managers, localisation engineers, dataentry operators etc.) throughout the devel-opment of a localisation project. TheLocalisation industry has to automate thetasks and activities of localisation processfor which a machine can perform betterthan a human.

Open standards can benefit the entireindustry and may play an important roleto integrate localisation developmenttools. The development of standards fortranslation technologies like XLIFF(XML Localization Interchange FileFormat), TMX (Translation MemoryeXchange) etc. have just started. Thesedeal primarily with formats rather thenimproving processes. But there is anurgent need to define localisation processworkflow and models. Support for mul-tiple locales and interoperability acrossplatforms is another issue to look at. Realpower of automated tools can only berealised when these tools are integratedinto a common framework, so that onetool can easily access the data producedby other tools.

Rekha Sharma works in the Graphicsand Computer Aided Design Division ofthe National Centre for SoftwareTechnology, Mumbai, India. She is cur-rently pursuing doctoral research in thearea of Localisation.

Next IssueThe Institute of Localisation Professionals,TILP, was established to provide individualsworking in the localisation industry withtheir own professional organisation.Proposition: The most urgent issues to beaddressed by TILP should be the develop-ment of professionalism in the industry, theestablishment of regular regional networkingevents, and the development of a localisa-tion web portal.Localisation Focus invites its readers tocomment on this statement and to send theircontributions to [email protected] by 21 April, 2003

Last issue’s proposition was: The main issue for the Localisation Industry in 2003 will be process

automation and standardisation. Open localisation standards, often talkedabout but never implemented, will finally allow customers, vendors, and

tools developers to integrate their technologies and processes.

Dear Editor,The December 2002 issue of Localisation

Focus characterised my keynote at the LRC 2002

Conference in November as being about “issues

of supply chain management in eContent.” This

description mistook my example for my message.

My speech was about a much bigger issue —effec-

tive communication in any context — which I

believe is the core value that the localisation indus-

try provides its clients.

Using content in places other than where it

was originally created requires both operational

changes (file type and regulatory conversions)

and marketing adaptations (translation and per-

sonalization) to support communication in any

venue on any device to any participant in your

business colloquy. Firms will benefit from the

lower costs of creating content just once, increased

flexibility in using it where needed, and more

effective communication with their customers.

Thank you.

Don DePalmaCommon Sense Advisory, Inc.

MARCH 2003 LRC.news 25LOCALISATION FOCUS

News Fom the

Localisation Research Center

INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOF LOCALISATION

The LRC has launched the first research

journal for localisation. The first issue of the

International Journal of Localisation will be

published in October 2003. The editorial

board includes academics and practitioners

in Europe and America. The call for papers

and guidelines for authors are available on

www.localisation.ie/publications/ijl. Deadline

for submission is 01 April 2003.

LRC 2003 CONFERENCEThe 8th Annual Localisation Conference

and Industry Showcase organised by the

LRC, incorporating Localisation Europe, will

take place on 18-20 November 2003 in

Dublin. LRC 2003 is organised in coopera-

tion with the Department of Computer Sci-

ence (UCD) and the European Union’s

ELECT project. Further details are available

on www.localisation.ie

2003 BEST THESIS AWARDThe winner of the 2003 Best Thesis Award

will be announced at the 2003 LRC Confer-

ence in Dublin (18-20 November). Students

who have completed a thesis on a relevant

theme within the past two years are invited

to submit their work. These may be submit-

ted prior to their degree award and will be

judged by a panel of academic and industry

experts. Closing date for submission is 31

August 2003. Further details are available on

www.localisation.ie.

LRC STAFFMichael Bourke joined the

LRC on 18 February of this

year to take charge of the

development of electonline

.org, the localisation industry

portal currently being devel-

oped at the LRC as part of the

EU-funded ELECT project.

WEBSITESThe following websites are worth a visit:

www.localisation.ie - The Localisation

Research Centre (LRC)

www.tilponline.org - The Institute of

Localisation Professionals (TILP)

http://electonline.csis.ul.ie - The European

Localisation Exchange Centre (ELECT)

THE INSTITUTE OF LOCALISATION

PROFESSIONALS

The Institute of Localisation Professionals

has started its first Roadshow to inform mem-

bers of the localisation community about its

aims and objectives. Should your company

wish to host a TILP Roadshow, please email

[email protected].

Michael Bourke

How TMX Helps You Achieve a Higher Return on Your

Investment in Translation and Localization

I n the 15 years since the firstComputer Aided Translation (CAT)tools came into the commercial

market, CAT has truly become a main-stream technology. Over the last fiveyears, the level of adoption has growntremendously, with many globalizationprofessionals now owning and using sev-eral different CAT tools to perform theirwork. File formats being translated haveevolved from simple text and word pro-cessing files into sophisticated DTP, weband software file formats. As these envi-ronments have evolved, the need forusing the right tool for the right job hasalso become essential to lowering the costand improving the quality of translationand localization.

As we enter 2003 and the years ahead,the next great opportunity or challengefacing many globalization managers ishow to maximize the value of those trans-lation assets that have been created usingCAT technology. And how does oneinsure those assets will always bereusable? Translation Memory eXchange(TMX) is the enabler to this next phase.

TMX is the vendor-neutral, openstandard for storing and exchangingtranslation memories developed by the Localization Industry Standards

Association (LISA) through its OSCAR(Open Standards for Container/ContentAllowing Re-use) Special Interest Group.TMX allows you to create memories inone CAT tool or file format and reuse orleverage them in another tool or format.For example, TMX-formatted memoriescreated with a tool optimized for localiz-ing a Windows User Interface can then bereused in another tool optimized fortranslating related online help so that thetwo are consistent; or TMX-formattedmemories created while translatingMicrosoft Word documents could bereused with a tool optimized for localizingFrameMaker or XML.

The standard is not yet perfect – stan-dards rarely are. However, vendors thathave committed to TMX have also com-mitted to continuing its perfection. Whatthat means to users is that they willachieve high reusability rates with toolsthat are certified as TMX compliant andthat reusability rates and format retentionwill get even better as the standard con-tinues to evolve.

By maintaining your translation memo-ries in vendor-neutral TMX, your optionsare kept open, and the value of your trans-lation assets is maintained. TMX is yourbridge to the future.

Find out more about TMX at www.lisa.org/tmx

This message has been sponsored by the following companies who are committed to supporting the TMX Open Standard for Translation Memories.

Media / Promotional Sponsors

TMX is a registered trademark of the Localization Industry Standards Association. Only products that have been certified

as TMX compliant by LISA are licensed to carry the TMX logo.

SCHOOL.loc MARCH 200326 LOCALISATION FOCUS

TRANSLATION WEB SERVICES

June 3, 9:00 am - 12:30 pm. This course intro-duces the issue of Translation Web Services and theemerging standard for these services developed bythe OASIS Technical Committee. Participants areexpected to be familiar with HTML. Instructor:Bill Looby, Software Architect Web GlobalisationTechnologies, IBM.

XLIFF

June 3, 1:30 - 5:00 pm. Introducing theXML-based Localisation Interchange FileFormat, the emerging localisation file standardformat being developed under the umbrella ofOASIS. Instructor: Tony Jewtushenko, SeniorTools Program Manager, Oracle.

INTRODUCTION TO XML

June 4, 9:00 am - 12:30 pm. This session pro-vides an overview of the basic facets of XML andits related technologies, from an internationalisa-tion perspective. Instructor: Yves Savourel,Localisation Solutions Architect, RWS Group.

LOCALISATION AND XML

June 4, 1:30 - 5:00 pm. This session exploresvarious challenges and advantages XML bringsto localisable material. Instructor: YvesSavourel, Localisation Solutions Architect, RWSGroup.

INTRODUCTION TO LOCALISATION

June 5, 9:00 - 10:30 am. This session pro-vides an introduction to the basics of localisa-tion, including the general localisation process,localisation project management, issuesinvolved in managing multi-national teams inremote locations and localisation specific issuesaround translation, engineering and testing.Instructor: John Malone, Director, Archetypon.

CULTURAL ADAPTATION OF PRODUCTS

June 5, 11:00 am - 12:30 pm. Linguistic andcultural adaptation have long been the corner-stones of the localisation effort. The course will

show why cultural adaptation is counterproductiveto the localiser’s core mission: to make foreign lan-guages and cultures more accessible to the rest ofthe world. Instructor: Reinhard Schäler.

June 5, 1:30 – 3:00 pm This session will dealwith documentation basics, translation memorytechnology, preparing Help and documentationfor translation and Help testing. Instructor:Antóin Ó Slatara, Researcher, LRC, Universityof Limerick.

June 5, 3:30 - 5:00 pm. This session will offer an

introduction to localisation engineering and testing

issues. Instructor: Tony O’Dowd, CEO, Alchemy

Software Development.

LOCALISATION OF MOBILE DEVICES

June 6, 9:00 - 10:30 am. Introducing the

issues around the localisation of handheld

devices, including a look at future challenges in

this area. Instructor: Shailendra Musale, F-

Secure Corporation, Finland.

June 6, 11:00 am - 12:30 pm. Focusing on the

benefits that automated localisation workflow can

deliver and analysing the automation requirements

of a business. Instructor: Damian Scattergood.

June 6, 1:30 - 5:00 pm. An overview ofLOTS, Localisation Technology Laboratory andShowcase, established by the LRC as part ofELECT, the EU-funded European LocalisationExchange Centre. Presenters: Rafael Guzmánand Patrice Fanning, Researchers, LRC,University of Limerick.

THE PRESENTERS IN IRELAND

Patrice Fanning is a researcher in the LRC at theUniversity of Limerick working on the ELECT project.

[email protected] Guzmán is a researcher in the LRC at theUniversity of Limerick currently working on theELECT project.

[email protected] Jewtushenko is Senior Tools Program Managerwith Oracle Corporation in Dublin. He chairs theXLIFF Technical Committee of OASIS.

[email protected] Looby is a software architect in the IBM multi-lingual computing group, looking at web servicesand their impact on globalisation. He is a foundingmember of OASIS.

Bill_Looby@ ie.ibm.comJohn Malone, is Director of International Sales andMarketing for Archetypon S.A. and a founding mem-ber of The Institute of Localisation Professionals.

[email protected] Musale works for F-SecureCorporation, Finland handling localisation pro-jects for handheld devices. He has written a primeron localisation for wireless devices.

Shailendra.Musale @F-Secure.comTony O Dowd is former Executive VP and GM ofCorel. He established the team that developed thetechnology that became Corel CATALYST. He lec-tured three years at Trinity College Dublin.

[email protected]óin Ó Slatara is a technical writer and course-ware author for the Localisation Research Centre.He has also worked as an instructional designerand localisation user assistance engineer.

[email protected] Savourel was involved in development ofXML applications OpenTag, TMX, and XLIFF.He is author of XML Internationalisation andLocalisation. Yves works for the RWS Group.

[email protected] Scattergood is managing director ofSTAR-Technology Solutions. His focus is onautomation and process engineering in localisationand business environments.

[email protected] Schäler is founder and director of theLocalisation Research Centre at the University ofLimerick, editor of Localisation Focus, founder andeditor of International Journal of Localisation,member of the editorial panel of MultiLingualComputing and Technology, founder and CEO ofThe Institute of Localisation Professionals, and vicechair of the OASIS Technical Committee onTranslation Web Services. He is a lecturer at theDepartment of Computer Science and InformationSystems (CSIS) at the University of Limerick, Ireland.

[email protected]

LOCALISATION TOOLS AND

TECHNOLOGIES AND LOTS

AUTOMATED LOCALISATION

WORKFLOW SOLUTIONS

LOCALISATION ENGINEERING

AND TESTING

DOCUMENT ENGINEERING

AND TRANSLATION

Third LRC International Localisation Summer School

FeesOne day (incl. lunch): €210 (€170 if you book

and pay before 20 April 2003)

Two days (incl. lunch) €380 (€350 if you book


Three days (incl. lunch) €500 (€430 if you book


Complete series (incl. lunch): €600 (€500 if you

book and pay before 20 April 2003)

20% discount for members of The Institute of

Localisation Professionals, TILP.

All bookings must be received with payment

by the LRC by 31 May 2003. The LRC cannot

refund booking fees but will accept substitutes for

confirmed delegates, provided it receives confir-

mation 2 working days before the event. Fees

include refreshments, buffet lunch (for full day

participants), and course material.

RegistrationFor programme updates, registration form and

further details of the 3rd LRC International Local-

isation Summer School, please consult the LRC

website, www.localisation.ie or contact directly

the LRC Summer School Office, CSIS, University

of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland, Tel.: +353-61-

202881, email: [email protected]

Places are limited and will be allocated on a

first-come first-served basis. The programme is

subject to change without notice.

REGISTRATION AND FEES

June 3 – 6, 2003University of LimerickLimerick, Ireland

www.e lec ton l ine .o rg

w w w. l o c a l i s a t i o n . i e

QUALITY ASSURANCE

June 18, 8:00am -12:00pm. This course coverstests performed at different levels of localised soft-ware products during the software life cycle. Instruc-tor: Jonathan Miller, Pervasive Software.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

June 18, 1:00pm - 5:00pm. An overview of thecomponents involved in managing complex locali-sation projects and the add-on value of professionalProject Management to a client and/or an organi-sation. Instructor: Brenda Hall, AustinTest.

CHARACTER ENCODING

June 19, 8:00am -12:00pm. Provides an under-standing of legacy character sets and the universalcharacter sets (customer data). Characters are iden-tified by code point and data interchange scenariosare examined. Instructor: Morgan McCullough,AustinTest.

LOCALISATION TOOLS OVERVIEW

June 19, 1:00pm - 5:00pm. Introduces some com-mon types of software tools used during the soft-ware internationalisation and localisation process,including GUI, TM, and other technologies. Instruc-tor: Rafael Guzman, LOTS Laboratory.

SOFTWARE ENABLEMENT

June 20, 8:00am -12:00pm. An examination ofthe globalisation, localisation, and internationalisa-tion processes and practices required to ensure thesmooth transition of a product into various inter-national locales. Instructor: Jim Yu, IBM.

LOCALISATION: CASE STUDIES

June 20, 1:00pm - 5:00pm. Provides an overviewof some real-world localisation problems and thesolution employed to maximise development effi-ciency. Instructor: Benetta Perry, IBM.

REGISTRATION AND FEES

Each seminar is $99. Enroll for a full day for$175 with lunch included. Enroll in the whole seriesfor $499 with lunches included.

Register before May 1 and receive a specially dis-counted price of $449 for the whole series. Majorcredit cards accepted.

Seats are limited. Dowload the registration format http://mistsy.home.texas.net/ summerschool.htmand mail, fax, or phone to:

Austin Community College, Continuing Education Division, 5930 Middle Fiskville Road, Austin, TX 78752 USA, Tel.: 512-223-7542, Fax: 512-223-7030.

T-Remote Memory

www.telelingua.com

The Next GenerationTranslation Memory

GET TRULY

GLOBAL!

System

Distributed Environment — Translators canwork from multiple locations anywhere in the world and can share the same memory. Translation memories can also be located anywhere in the world.Flexibility — No restriction on TM software used by your translator. You have a wider choice of translators for a project.Ease of Use — No retraining necessary! Translators work in MS Word.Management — Significant reduction of project managers' technical and preparation tasks.Quality — Translations will benefit from increased leveraging and consistency.Control & Security — Your translation capital is protected. Your TM is stored safely on your disks — no need to distribute them.

June 18 – 20, 2003Austin Community College

Austin, Texas, USA

T he University of Limerick in Ireland andAustin Community College in Texas are

two of the first academic institutions to offeran academic programme of study in localisa-tion, backed and supported by industry lead-ers on both sides of the Atlantic. Now theyhave coordinated their efforts to bring theseprogrammes to the wider localisation com-munity at two different venues.

The 2003 Summer School is building on thesuccess of two Summer Schools organised pre-viously by the LRC and held in 2001 and 2002,respectively, at the University of Limerick.

Who should attend the Limerich Summer School?

Day one is aimed at localisation profes-sionals, localisation tools and technology devel-opers, and researchers who would like to learnabout two of the most important emergingstandards in the localisation world.

Day two is aimed at localisation profes-sionals, localisation tools and technologydevelopers, and researchers who would liketo learn more about XML and its applica-tion in localisation.

Day three is aimed at participants with lit-tle or no prior knowledge of localisation, andlocalisation professionals who would like tolearn more about localisation issues outsideof their current area of expertise.

Day four is aimed at participants withsome prior knowledge of localisation as wellas at localisation professionals who wouldlike to learn more about localisation issuesoutside of their current area of expertise,especially at those interested in localisationprocess and technology solutions.

All courses will be delivered in a desig-nated state-of-the-art computer labora-tory. Courses are designed to providehands-on experience to participants, willcover the latest versions of tools and tech-nologies and practical exercises. All par-ticipants will have access to PCs, theInternet and the appropriate tools andtechnologies. Some of the tools and tech-nologies introduced during the SummerSchool at the LRC will be available forpurchase at a special price, exclusivelyavailable to course participants.

Participation at the Summer School willbe acknowledged by The Institute of Local-isation Professionals (TILP) as part-fulfilmentof the requirements for professional mem-bership. Participants will receive a TILP cer-tificate of attendance on successfulcompletion of courses.

The LRC Summer School is supported bythe European Localisation Exchange Centre,ELECT, funded under the European UnioneContent Programme (www.electonline.org).

Limerick, IrelandAustin, Texas, USA

MARCH 2003 SCHOOL.loc 27LOCALISATION FOCUS

www.t i lponl ine .org

PERSONAL.profile MARCH 200328 LOCALISATION FOCUS

The application of informa-

tion technologies to the

increased efficiencies in

localisation or translation

processes is resulting in

breakthroughs that will have an even

greater impact on global economic devel-

opment. I make this observation from

over 30 years experience in the informa-

tion technology industry with the last 15

years researching and directing electronic

commerce standards efforts. As the CEO

of OASIS, a global consortium that drives

the development, convergence and adop-

tion of e-business standards, I have been

afforded the privilege to participate in a

broad range of international elec-

tronic business activities.

Through this work, I have found

that the one challenge that still

must be overcome if we are to

achieve full-scale global e-Business

is the application of translation/

localisation technologies to enable

multi-lingual business transactions

over the Internet. A critical first

step in this direction is to get global

‘buy-in’, support and adoption of

the infrastructure standards for e-

Business. In parallel we need the

same pervasive adoption of interna-

tional standards that enable the seamless

interaction between project partners in the

translation/localisation processes. OASIS is

known for its practical process of accom-

plishing mission critical standards work and

we are emerging as a front-runner in trans-

lation standards arena. We can’t accomplish

this alone, which is why we have forged

liaisons with other organisations such as the

Localisation Research Centre (LRC) in

Ireland and the Localisation Industry

Standards Association (LISA) in Geneva.

So, what has OASIS been doing to

address these problems? In early 2002,

the OASIS XML Localisation Interchange

File Format (XLIFF) Technical

Committee was formed to advance a

specification for managing the process of

document exchange in the translation

process. Then, a few months ago, OASIS

members formed a technical committee to

develop standards to automate transla-

tion and localisation processes as a Web

service. The OASIS Translation Web

Services TC will develop a Web service

definition language for interactions

between publishers of content who need it

translated into different languages and

the translation vendors who provide the

translation services. The expected benefit

of this emerging Web service standard

will be the improved efficiency (reduction

in process cost and time) in the transla-

tion and localisation of documents (soft-

ware, documentation, or any web infor-

mation). This lower cost and quicker

turn-around time will enable more com-

panies to make available more informa-

tion to more people in more languages.

To help focus our future activities in

this area, OASIS conducted an online sur-

vey in 2002 with the LISA organization.

This survey evaluated the impact of local-

isation technologies on global electronic

business. The results of the survey showed

that the vast majority of those companies

that provide an online service today want

to provide multiple language implementa-

tions of their website in the near future.

Another portion of the survey found that

over 75% of the respondents want to be

able to conduct multilingual e-Business

transactions. Also, we found that almost

90% were planning to use a Web service

to support their translation processes.

These results affirmed the OASIS commit-

ment to localisation standards efforts.

Since the mid 1990s, there have been

many efforts toward enabling the Internet

to support global marketplaces. As the use

of the Internet increases globally, the per-

centage of non-English users continues to

rise dramatically. In order for any compa-

ny or government worldwide to fully utilize

the benefits of the Internet, it is essential

that they be able to efficiently operate in a

multi-lingual global environment. Because

OASIS builds much of the infrastructure

standards for global electronic business, it

is incumbent that we continue to provide

leadership in this area and to work with

organisations such as LISA and LRC to

drive the adoption of standards that pro-

vide enterprises, both large and small, with

the tools to conduct global electronic busi-

ness in multiple languages.

My personal passion for achieving this

goal has been fueled by my exposure to

governmental leaders worldwide who

have the vision to see the potential future

benefits of global e-Business to improve

the economic development of their coun-

try. In my recent role as chair of a UN

team that advises governments in tran-

sitional economies on best practices for

use of the Internet, I have worked close-

ly with governmental ministers from

many countries in Eastern Europe, the

Commonwealth of Independent States

and Central Asia. They have expressed

to me this same goal of harnessing

Information & Communication Tech-

nologies (ICT) for economic develop-

ment that has been impressed upon me

through meetings I have had with such

leaders as Lee Teng-hui, the former

President of Taiwan Republic of China,

and Askar Akayev, the President of the

Kyrgyz Republic.

Throughout history, mankind has pro-

gressed when the adoption of a common

language became a unifying force that

enabled cooperative efforts. We are now at

the threshold of a new era where we can

change that paradigm to apply linguistic

and Internet technologies in ways that

allow people to retain their local language

and culture and yet achieve cooperative

efforts on a global scale. This will only be

possible with widespread and global adop-

tion of common standards, but I believe

that the members of OASIS will lead the

way in this momentous effort.

Patrick J. Gannon is President andCEO of OASIS, The Organization forthe Advancement of Structured Infor-mation Standards, a global consortiumthat drives the development, convergenceand adoption of e-business standards.Patrick can be reached at [email protected]

A Passion for OASISPatrick J. Gannon, President and CEO of OASIS (Organization

for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards), discusses his 30 years vast experience in the IT industry and looking to the future with OASIS.

“Throughout history, mankind has pro-gressed when the adoption of a commonlanguage became a unifying force that

enabled cooperative efforts. We are nowat the threshold of a new era where wecan change that paradigm to apply lin-

guistic and Internet technologies in waysthat allow people to retain their local lan-guage and culture and yet achieve coop-

erative efforts on a global scale.”

MARCH 2003 BOOKS.loc 29LOCALISATION FOCUS

Computer-Aided Translation: A Practi-cal Introduction, University of Ottawa

Press, 2002, Lynne Bowker, ISBN:

0776605380, €27.50

Lynne Bowker’s Computer-AidedTranslation: A Practical Introduction, as

part of the University of Ottawa's Didac-tics of Translation series, acknowledges

the role that technology plays in the

translation industry and introduces a

wide range of Computer-Aided Transla-

tion (CAT) tools needed for survival in

today’s global market.

Computer-Aided Translation: A Practi-cal Introduction comprises of 6 chapters.

Within the 6 chapters Bowker gives us

a well-informed description of tools such

as Optical Character Recognition (OCR)

and Voice-Recognition software along

with Corpus-analysis tools and

Terminology Management. Bowker

provides an in-depth analysis of

Translation Memory Systems, one

of the newest and most exciting

CAT tools that have become avail-

able in recent years. Bowker gives

us an interesting preview into the

future of new technologies and emerging

trends including software localisation and

diagnostic tools.

In each chapter Bowker gives illustrated

examples of how different technologies

work along with an analysis of the advan-

tages and disadvantages of using these tools.

Each chapter also ends with a summary of

key points and suggested further reading.

The book also has two appendices; Appen-

dix A contains a glossary of important terms

and concepts related to translation technol-

ogy and Appendix B provides

details about commercially

available CAT tools.

Computer-Aided Trans-lation: A Practical Intro-duction is ideal for

translation students and

trainers while translators

who wish to learn more about CAT tech-

nology will also find this book very useful.

Lynne Bowker is assistant Professor in

Translation at the University of Ottawa.

She is the co-author of Working WithSpecialized Language: A Practical Guideto Using Corpora (2002) and co-editor

of the annual Bibliography of Transla-tion Studies.

— Deirdre Coffey

Book Review

Computer-Aided Translation: A Practical Introduction

ADVISORY.board MARCH 200330 LOCALISATION FOCUS

The LRC at UL is the focal point and the

research and educational centre for local-

isation. It is one of the world’s leading intelli-

gence, technology and educational localisation

centres. The LRC was established in 1995 at

University College Dublin under the Irish

Government and European Union funded

Technology Centres Programme as the

Localisation Resources Centre. When the cen-

tre moved to the University of Limerick (UL) in

1999, it merged with UL’s Centre for Language

Engineering and was renamed the Localisation

Research Centre (LRC).

The LRC is owned by UL. It has a director,

faculty members and project staff. Its Industrial

Advisory Board represents a large section of the

localisation industry. The LRC is supported by

UL, its Industrial Advisory Board, subscribers to

its services and Enterprise Ireland. Its main areas

of research are:

Industry intelligence

Localisation Exchange Point

Localisation Directory

Contact Database

Surveys and industry studies

Education and training

Graduate Diploma / MSc in Software

Localisation

Professional Certification

Professional Development Courses

Localisation Teaching and Training

Network (LttN)

International Localisation Summer

School

Technology

Localisation Technology Laboratory

and Showcase

Tools and technology evaluation

and certification

Translation and test automation

Annual LRC Best Thesis Award

sponsored by Symantec Ireland

The LRC and its functionsAlan Barrett Director of Technology,

International Product Development, IBM

Gerry Carty General Manager, VivendiUniversal Publishing Ireland

Ian Dunlop VP & GM, Provisioning Services & Solutions Group, Novell Inc.

Mervyn Dyke Managing Director,VistaTEC

Seamus Gallen National Software Directorate

James Grealis Director EMEALocalisation, Symantec

Wendy Hamilton Vice President Business Development, Bowne Global Solutions

Martin Hynes Senior Analyst, FORFÁS

Brian Kelly Vice President, Berlitz John Malone Director International

Sales and Marketing,Archetypon

Paul McBride Director European Operations, VeriTest (Division of Lionbridge)

Patti McCann Director of Localisation,Business Tools Division,Microsoft

Dave MacDonald ConsultantDirk Metzger Translation Manager, SAPDavid Murphy Director Localisation,

Siebel SystemsMichael O’Callaghan Vice President, OracleBrian O’Donovan Senior Development

Manager, IBM IrelandAnthony O’Dowd President, Alchemy

SoftwareKevin Ryan VP Academic Affairs, ULReinhard Schäler Director, LRCJim Seward Head of Professional

Services, ETP

LRC Industrial Advisory Board

The LRC Industrial Advisory Board meets at leasttwice a year to review the work of the LRC, adviseon potential projects and strategies, and providesupport for its actions. Members of the boardrecognise the importance of the LRC’s activitiesfor the localisation industry and support its aimsand objectives.The board’s chairperson is Alan Barrett (IBM).He was elected at the board’s first meeting inDecember 1999.

Documents

March 2003 LF Color - localisation.ie · MARCH 2003 COUNTRY.focus LOCALISATION FOCUS 5 There is a real demand for localisation tools The more tools we have the lower the costs and