Hello,
Currently I work as technical support expert for Sisulizer Ltd. Sisulizer is author of known professional localization tool and I know good all localization tools, localization platforms, issues and maybe some my ideas will be useful for you and translators. I would like to learn something about your preferred localization method. Most developers use below described below 4 solutions:
1.Translators have access to source files in some common formats, for example DLL, XLIFF, XML, INI, PO/POT files, delimited text files etc… This is good and flexible solution and allows translators on using their preferred localization tools. Additional, if translator have access to language files in targeted format, he also can validate localized UI files with “real working” localized application. Unfortunately, this solution has also faults. Seem to me that for “open source” localization method is very hard to synchronize work between team members, because they could use different tools to localization (not always professional), additional open access to e.g. DLL file can be dangerous for developers.
2.Developers send to translators localization project files created by specialized localization tools, such as, Sisulizer, Alchemy Catalyst or Passolo and translator use these same localization software to translations. This method is fastest solution and give high quality localizations, because professional localization tools have implemented very advanced validation features. I’ve began my localization work with notepad, but now I know that with specialized localization tool I can to do this same job at least 50 - 100 times faster (with better quality) than e.g. with PSPad, UltraEdit or Resource Hacker. For example this forum site could be created with MS Notepad, but how many time it take? This is also very good solution for team work, because specialized localization software have usually implemented groupware features. Unfortunately, this solution needs deep knowledge about localization tools, because these software are usually advanced and complicated applications. Additional, these tools are very expensive (at least for developers, because editions for translators are usually for free).
3.Developers use custom localization tools. This solution give translators free localization software, but quality and features of these tools are usually very bad. This is not problem if tool use common format of source files e.g. INI, CSV, XML or XLIFF, because it allows on using software preferred by translators, bur when developers use also custom file format I always say “No, thanks”.
4.Online solution. This is good solution for shared localizations and translators needn’t to use own PC. He needs only access to Internet and internet browser. However this method have faults similar to custom developer tools, that is, it doesn’t allow on using validation features, translator can’t import localization resources, for example from repository or glossary files etc… But this is possible if you will implement to potential online solution option for export to some common file format from website resource. It allows on using by translators their preferred localization software. Any time ago I helped some developer in implementation following online localization solution:
-website based on PHP solution with translation forms, where translator can directly translate strings via browser
-import/export component. Translator can export from site all translations resource to XML/XLIFF file and next translate or validate (spell checking, duplicate hotkeys validation, variable/placeholder syntax validation, etc.). After it translator can upload (import) changed XLIFF file on translation website
- To localized application was added script for convert exported XLIFF file to targeted language file format (PHP, because application has Web UI), and translator can to test translation with working application.
Could you tell some words about your solution?
Best regards,
Janusz
