Start a new topic


Hi guys,

I think Matchboard is a really big improvement over the old way, like having everything "auto searched" in a sole place makes freeing space, and getting a clean and quick view of what you really need to focus on.

I was kind of excited over this new feature, but with time, I'm find it more and more useless the way it is conceived:

(Screenshot attached)

1. The way it shows the name and % of matches, IMHO, eats too much space, it's almost the half of the bar without giving that much info. I'd suggest to make it smaller using a proper color coding, like Purple for MT, orange for Auto assembly, red for exact matches, yellow for terms ... (only exemplary), this way we could quickly identify what kind of "element" we are looking for/at easily while we could remove the extra space for "what kind of element it is".

2. As for some languages pairs, Auto assembly is not "that important", so, why couldn't we just making it not to display or put it at the end of the list? This could free space too and not making us scroll to find.

3. Related to the 1st one, it's almost impossible to identify terms at a glance as the matching colours are just the same as the fragments one. We need to READ to know what's a term in glossary, isn't it counterproductive? Mu suggestion would be adding different colours as in the 1st suggestion giving the option of removing the tags "prefix match", "exact term", etc. AND grouping them by category: 1st MT, 2nd TM, 3rd Terms, 4th Non translatable, 5th Fragments (being customisable e.g.).

4. TM matches are displayed horizontally in cells, it makes horrible to read when using the matchboard in "Dock Vertically". I think horizontally would do it best, one below the other.

What do you think?

I've already mentioned this - the information boxes in the Matchboard are too wide. It's a waste of space. Seperate box colour for glossary would certainly be welcome by many. I still think that numbering mathboard results (at least ones that come first, like in F  windows) would be of be assistance.





1 person likes this

Yeah, I like the number suggestion too. A little bit out of topic, I use a huge master TM but I get lots of fragment suggestions from there, which is amazing, but most of them are almost repeated stuff, is there anyway I could tell CafeTran to offer less but more accurate?


>2. As for some languages pairs, Auto assembly is not "that important",

For me, it's everything. But I only need the result in the segments editor.

BTW: Could you please embed images in your posting, instead of attaching them? Simply drag them into this editing area:


Or click this icon and navigate to the image:


Makes reading your appreciated postings on small devices (iPhone etc.) a lot easier.

Login to post a comment