Start a new topic

REQ: Easier & faster joining of tabs

We already had this request in a similar manner. But maybe this is rather difficult to implement.

But how about that?

  • there is a shortcut to join tabs. Wasn't there a feature to double-click a tab to close it (or was it only a request?) – if it was only a request, a double-click would also be an option (though the double-click to close is more logical IMHO)
  • the actual tab or the last clicked tab now gets a title in a different color (or begins to blink, but this might be too intrusive)
  • BTW, this state 'activated' of the tab should be stopped by pressing the Esc key
  • the next title of a tab that is clicked on will be joined with the activated tab
  • if the users clicks somewhere else, the state 'activated' of the tab will be stopped

It is simply very annoying to rearrange the tabs again and again, especially for smaller jobs. A easier and faster way to join tabs would really be helpful. 

1 person likes this idea

Hello tre,

I’m not sure if this can help in the meantime (apologies if it doesn’t), but it seems Project Templates remember joined tabs.

If you tend to join resources and arrange window layout in the same fashion across different projects, you might wish to try saving a project template after closing a project where your resources were arranged as you wish.


I've advised the same, in the past.

Currently I'm planning to create several "universal" Project Template templates, one for each file format and subject field/resources combination.

I did not think of templates, indeed.

But if you join

TM for Client A - Total Recall TM - Standard TB - Specialized TB XY

and you save it in the template, the result for client B won't be

TM for Client B - Total Recall TM - Standard TB - Specialized TB XY

At least this is what I assume. And to save the position – if this ever works – after closing a job and saving the template, is a highly illogical method, in my humble opinion (who would assume this, if not reading all posts in this forum).

Bad documentation can be really annoying.


1 person likes this

I think Templates are still being refined, but once they are complete, I agree it would be great to have a detailed documentation on this important recently introduced feature.


Took me some time to figure out how to use them best. I guess I too am still in the discovery phase.

I started using different templates per language pair, as you can have different web resources (and remove any irrelevant resources for that language pair).

This helped have most resources I needed for a “same language pair” project ticked by default (Total Recal TM, ProjectTM, Big Papa TM [thanks woorden], IATE glossary [and project glossary, in case I need to use or import one for a project/client], plus the MT engines and the multiple web resources I use).

Simply having to tick/untick a resource or quickly importing a TM/TB still speeds up the preparation of the job.

I more recently understood the window layout and status of joined/docked tabs is also remembered, so I’ve updated my templates (save again under the same template name), and now I’m also saving some custom ones after finishing a project where the resources used are likely to be reused in the future (client specific, etc).

I don’t like having one TM by client, I use the default CT feature of one Project TM and then either Big Mama or Total Recall, since client info can easily be set in the Project configuration and in TMX edit mode, if you need to filter this afterwards.

All project TMs are copied in language pair specific TM folders, and renamed to show date, client, project and language pair, so that they can be reused as I see fit (open the folder as a Big Mama TM, help recreate a Total recall easily, quickly gather specific client TMs in a new folder and open them as TM in CT, etc.).


In your example where specific TM/TB resources used for two different clients, you could create a client A template, and also save one New Client (universal) template that you use for new client projects, defining some of the resources you wish to use, and requiring some further resources and fine-tuning. After the end of a first project, you can save the template with the name of the client.

I would not go as far as say it is illogical, it does has its logic, although not an obvious one :-)


Okay, maybe "illogical" is too hard, but "highly counter-intuitive" would do the trick (as I said before, at least for those who don't read this forum regularly).

A kind of template editor (if you don't want to poke around with the XML file) would be welcome, also for the beginners out there.

>I started using different templates per language pair

It would be nice to have some language-specific settings stored in the templates: the content of the AA fields (for quotes, dashes etc.) and the content of the DNM characters, for instance.

>After the end of a first project, you can save the template with the name of the client.

It would be nice if this could indeed be done while the project is still open, from the Project menu, instead of from the Dashboard only (before opening a project).

>Big Papa TM [thanks woorden]

Please note that this isn't an original idea of Van den Broek: he has 'borrowed' it from the Déjà Vu dinosaurs.

Lenting: ...he has 'borrowed' it from the Déjà Vu dinosaurs

True, both the idea and the name come from DejaVu, and it's "old" for CAT tool standards. I think it was suggested by one of the DV users around the year 2000. In those days, you could only attach one memory for segments, one termbase, and one lexicon to your Project. However, I think that Jean refers to my article on how you can use a Big Mama and a Big Papa in CafeTran in the days you can have several resources.


1 person likes this

Exactly so, Hans (woorden), I knew these concepts where imported from Dejà Vu, but I was referring to the implementation of the Big Mama and Big Papa approaches in the specific multi-resource environment of CafeTran, as detailed in your article and as advocated in several of your forum contributions, along with TMX superiority over Tab-dels (glossaries), I might add :-)

PS: I'm also going to make a CT question/feature request related to this approach in a separate post.

>along with TMX superiority over Tab-dels (glossaries)

Could you please elaborate? Would be interesting to hear about this.

On a more serious note: this DeepL is absolutely frightening. It'll change the market.

I was just joking about TMs for fragments vs glossaries/TBs. I'm happy both solutions are implemented in CT, they have their use.

As far as opinions go, I'll paraphrase what photographers say about cameras:

"The best glossary* is the one you have with you".

*termbase, etc.

1 person likes this

idim: I'm happy both solutions are implemented in CT, they have their use

That's what I'm challenging: Apart from them being able to use regexes, tab del glossaries are vastly inferior.


To come back to the point:

  • templates don't do what I want (easier & faster joining)
  • as soon as a general template is combined with a specific setting (e.g. a client TM), the template “forgets“ the rest of joined tabs (and you won't create one template per client, I assume)
  • would be nice to have a feature "all tabs are being joined corresponding to the template setting as far as possible" - example: template has "TM Alpha, Total Recall TM and TB Gamma" joined, when template is triggered and TM Alpha is deselected and/or replaced by TM Beta, at least Total Recall TM and TB Gamma are joined
  • BTW: in the actual state templates are for nerds – no documentation and at least in parts strange, un-intuitive configuration. I use them and I even hack the XML file, but I would feel better if it was an easier task for rookies, as only user-friendliness secures the future of CT

Login to post a comment