Start a new topic

FEATURE REQUEST - SIMPLE TEXT FORMAT CAPABILITY

Hello,


I mentioned before over on the Google group, but I want to formally request this feature. Use of tags is not an option for me working from Japanese to English.


Japanese uses goofy symbols instead of bold lettering for UI components, even when referencing English versions of software. See the example below:


「Verify」の画面で、"YES"を選択し、[F1]キーを押します。


Which should be something like:


On the Verify screen, select YES and then press the F1 key.


I am really tired of doing all this translation in CafeTran and then having to go back and apply bold to all of this in Trados afterward.


Please don't confuse what I mean by that. I LOVE working in CafeTran and why I would still rather have to apply bold in Trados afterward rather than working in Trados. 


Please add simple text format capability to CafeTran!


2 people like this idea

YES YES YES PLEASE! Basic formatting in the target pane would be very, very welcome.


Michael

Impossible, I think. Everything is possible, but it would require codings for each and every file format. There already is basic formatting in the target pane in CT:



Which shows in an SDLXLIFF file as:



I doubt if this works, but I can't check it. The usual SDLXLIFF tags for bold (milk processing undertaking):



If the CT basic formatting for bold doesn't work, how would you code it for SDLXLIFF, and for all other deviant formats?


H.



If I knew how to code, I would just do it myself, no?

96% of my work is in .docx files, so basic formatting in the target pane for .docx files is all I really care about.

JD: If I knew how to code, I would just do it myself, no?


Yes. And I have little doubt Igor can do it. But I think (I'm not certain this time, and only this time) that the coding will have to vary for several file formats, especially or exclusively for formats that are already projects, like SDLXLIFF. Did you try the basic CT formatting (that I can't check)?


MB: 96% of my work is in .docx files


For docx files, CT's basic formatting works, though it's not WYSIWYG.


H.

I will certainly give it a try.

How is this performed?

JD: How is this performed?


By typing b followed by escape for the first tag, and /b followed by escape for the second tag. Mutatis mutandis for i and u etc.


H

woorden: By typing b followed by escape for the first tag, and /b followed by escape for the second tag.

It doesn't work, you get garbage in Studio, and no bold.

I second Jason, this is very important for us (JP sources translators).

Though I do not agree that the Japanese symbols mentioned above are goofy... :-)

AC: ...this is very important for us

 

I don't doubt that, I just wondered how it can be realised. It could very well be rather complicated for SDLXLIFF, and impossible to make it "universal."


H.

AC: It doesn't work, you get garbage in Studio, and no bold


I was afraid of that (see my TextWrangler rendering of it), but I couldn't check it in Trados, nor in the final document, of course.


H.

woorden: but I couldn't check it in Trados


Getting rid of Trados would be fantastic but is not realistic in my case, so I stick to Parallels Desktop and Studio for the final check of sdlxliff files. I wonder what is your solution. A Windows friend verify all your files before delivery?

AC: A Windows friend verify all your files before delivery?


That's what I used to do. Years ago. But there weren't any problems, never. So now I just send them to the client. I suppose the language pair is decisive here.


H.

Hans, would this always be pt69 in sdlxliff files? If so, it would be relatively easy to let ct write b and /b as pt69 in sdlxliff. If the ID for bold font is different in every sdlxliff, then this trick won't work. Perhaps one could use the *bold* markup. And perhaps there is some open exchange plugin to change that to real bold? Anyway, best is of course to avoid Studio completely, if possible.
woorden: I suppose the language pair is decisive here.

 

Hans, I suppose you translate from English. What do you do with a similar case without Studio?

The source contains cu.ft instead of ft3. In French, I have to translate it as pi3, but with an exponent for the 3 (like the tags 3 and 4 of m3 in the source below). I see only one solution for the moment: to do it in Studio.



Login to post a comment