270 likes | 359 Views
„Future Web-Based Translation Environments“. Stefan Kreckwitz Senior System Engineer across Systems GmbH. Localisation Research Forum 28 September 2007, Dublin, Ireland. Overview. Introduction Web 1.0 and Translation Environments Web 2.0 Translation Environments The Challenges Outlook.
E N D
„Future Web-Based Translation Environments“ Stefan KreckwitzSenior System Engineeracross Systems GmbH Localisation Research Forum28 September 2007, Dublin, Ireland
Overview • Introduction • Web 1.0 and Translation Environments • Web 2.0 Translation Environments • The Challenges • Outlook
Shortcomings of Translation Environments • SW-installation, updates, patches • MS Windows-based • Frequent data synchronisations • Results reach the team with delay • Continuing work on another PC is difficult
Translation Environments - Overview • More than hundred person years development • MS Windows applications • Thick clients • GUI and business logic create local CPU load • High interaction between • Source / target text • Translation memory (TM) • Terminology • Quality assurance • Rich set of features…
Translation Environments - Features • Editing • Different language keyboards and input method editors • WYSIWYG editing of styles, user-friendly insertion of tags • Autotext / autoreplace • Efficient transfer of matches • Comments and bookmarks • Navigation • Mouse and keyboard shortcuts • Segmentation • Expansion and shrinking segments
Translation Environments - Features • Display • Highlighting of TM/terminology matches and numbers • Quality errors (spelling error underlining) • WYSIWYG preview for source/target text • Search • Concordance search • Search in source/target • Terminology/TM search with filters • Quality assurance • Spell checking • Checking of number formats, styles, tags, etc.
Conventional Web Applications (Web 1.0) • Mostly read-only • Small degree of interactivity • Form-based • Full page reloading for displaying different data sets • Common usage in the translation industry: • Project portals • Terminology systems
Conclusion • Web 1.0 applications could not meet the requirements for translation environments: • Interactivity • Poor user experience • Missing know how about building complex applications
Web 2.0 Applications • Phrase coined by O'Reilly Media in 2003 • Social aspects • Collaboration and sharing • Examples: Social networks, wikis, blogs • Technological aspects • Smart re-loading • PC-equivalent interactivity • Examples • MS Live search • Google Docs & Spreadsheets
Web 2.0 Translation Environments Today • Still restricted functionality • Mainly core features • Less automatisms • For some projects benefits overweigh • For other projects it can mean • More time • Higher costs • Lower quality
The Challenges • Replace Windows specific components • Move load to a server • Split heavy processes into lightweight processes • Implement smart re-loading • Adjust usability • Consider Browser specific problems • Internet speed and availability
The Challenges There is a high dynamic: • Web 2.0 tools are getting rapidly more powerful • Developers gain experience day by day • Benefits will push the process of convergence • First Internet offline solutions are available (Google gears) • High speed Internet is getting ubiquitous • Mixed solutions will be necessary for the near future • On long term Web 2.0 solutionswill dominate
Outlook – More Web 2.0 Solutions • Web 2.0 applications for further tasks • Alignment • Term extraction • Term translation • Author assistance
Outlook- Software As a Service • Trend away from the purchase of software • Charge costs on basis of the utilization • Full-stack function scope required • Provider cares about • Hardware • Installation • Maintenance • Administration • No software life cycle, but continuous improvements
Harnessing Collective Intelligence • Key-feature of successful Web 2.0 applications • Wikipedia • Googles Page Rank • Wikipedia-like Terminology DBs and TMs • Pros • Can reduce cost and time • „Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow“ • Cons • Quality • Security • Confidentiality • Intellectual property rights • Acceptance is unknown
Thank you! Contact: www.across.net Stefan Kreckwitz skreckwitzATacross.net