Could you provide the exact link to what you tried to quote? It's kind of hard to understand what your post is about, and who wrote what.
PS: that line endings issue is ANNOYING. Same problem when copy/pasting in from Notepad on Windows. I now write my posts in EmEditor, so I can keep an eye on the line endings.
As Tweetie Bird says:
In the Wf Pro list the developer wrote a posting that I'd like the share here for potential discussion:
>"long" in "long glossary" is relative. I have a glossary of over 60,000 terms.
My BG is now nearing 900,000 lines.
>It's all jargon, botanics, zoology, ornithology, mechanics, nuclear physics, medicine, you name it, over 40 domains.
In ct you can use subject fields.
>But there aren't 40 translations for vague English words like "get", "give" etc., unless they're in a technical context.
I disagree. Especially those generic words can be difficult to translate. Then I'm happy that 'all' translations are listed. My approach is quite the opposite: type every translation only once, Hans. That is: in the glossary.
>That's because the linguist is me, not the machine. I'm faster done, and more accurate, translating common words ex nihilo than browsing 9 suggestions.
I think that ct offers splendid ways to quickly chose your preferred trans and remember your choice.
>I still respect those who would rather have a dictionary-like glossary.
I do respect them too. But since I use my glossaries for AA, I don't make them Dictionary Style.
Yeah, I saw that. I went to https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/wordfast_beta/conversations/messages/15147 but couldn’t find the original message you were quoting from.
PS: if you add a link in a post here, use the menu to make it clickable!
My own big glossary is a combination of the two styles: Dictionary Style + AA style.
>PS: if you add a link in a post here, use the menu to make it clickable!
If only you would know under which extreme conditions I write these postings, you wouldn't be asking for Extrawurst! You're getting spoiled Mr.
>My own big glossary is a combination of the two styles: Dictionary Style + AA style.
I like your other description better ("it's a bit of an unorganised little of everything").
You and I do very different kinds of jobs, in different languages. Your pure AA style approach just won't work for most of my stuff. I'm sure the missing Hans, and you, would disagree, and I would then disagree with that, and you would then …
However, sometimes, with certain kinds of texts (legal, and certain kinds of IT/technical texts/repeat clients), it is useful, and so specific parts of my big glossary are geared towards pure AA.
Just get a specialisation ;).
Isn't that what TM-Town's al about?
I'm working on it as we speak. I have decided to start moving over to IT, from legal. I am very good at legal, but IT comes much more naturally, so I have decided to start focusing on IT.