For the sake of consistency & easiness to remember, I would recommend:
segment = what the CAT tool segments your text into (one src and one trgt segment together form a TU, or translation unit)
sub-segment = a piece (or fragment) of a segment
I think segment + sub-segment is easier to remember and make sense of than segment + fragment.
There is a slight difference between sub-segments and fragments. When you already have or add a fragment to a translation memory, there is an existing reference (a separate unit) between the source and target fragment. For example, you can add to the memory the following pair:
me gusta = I like
then you have a real unit which, when found in the segment "me gusta ir al cine", is called a fragment.
In contrast, when CafeTran extracts a piece of text from the segment making a 'guess' what its translation is, such a virtual and non-existing fragment (there is no separately-added unit in the TM) is called a sub-segment.
> Fragment = Subsegment-level exact match
Yes. That is correct.
> Subsegment = Subsegment-level fuzzy match
Well, fuzziness usually means that there is no exactness in the translation, only an approximation. Whereas subsegments are usually 'guessed' correctly (no fuzziness at all) so I would rather call them:
Subsegment = Subsegment-level virtual match
My small brain is confused. If I want/prefer to create a TMX glossary instead of TAB one, should I use Segments memory or Fragments memory? I would bet on Fragments, but things are getting very complex here ;-)
Alain: ... I would bet on Fragments
So would I.
...but things are getting very complex here
That's because Igor is in the process of simplifying things, mainly by adding features.
Thank you woorden, I will stick to Fragments and see...