With the recent updates, my workflow has improved a lot, now I can say CT is a tool I can use in my daily job, it's just amazing :)
However, I have some little tricks that could highly improve CT, will explain them:
- The QA is a bit confusing, If we run more than one check at a time, the type of error is hard to identify as all of them appears in purple, so it's mandatory to read the type of error we're trying to fix. I think it could be better if we could have different colors to identify the error instead of having to read it.
- QA Templates. When using "Check all", we could have a little button to load our own QA profile, so that, we don't need to tick/untick the checking we want to apply each time.
- QA dismiss. When running the QA, we use to get some false positives. If we had the possibility to dismiss those, we could re-run the QA for being sure we don't miss anything, but avoiding having all the false positives displayed again.
- When running the "Term consistency" check, sometimes, with long segments, it's hard to identify the missing term so, I think we could have them (the missing ones) underlined in red or some other very identifiable color to quick find the term that need attention.
2. Tooltips in terms.
When working with the keyboard, if we want to know/enter a term, we just need to type the first character and then SHIFT to get the pop-up menu where we can pick one if there's more than one term. I think it could be very useful if we could do the same but pointing with the cursor the term in source segment, i.e. if there's a term in our term base (which will be underlined in the source segment editor), if we put the cursor on this term, the same pop-up menu would appear after a small delay, like 2 seconds or so. This is very handy when using the mouse (I tend to do it a lot in CT because I still find a bit hard to differentiate terms from termbases at a glance in the Matchboard).
3. Mark for repetitions.
I know this is something very very memoQ style, but it's SO useful! The behavior is the same: when we enter into a segment that is the first of some repetitions, we could have some mark/sing indicating this segment would be autopropagated all over the document/project, this way we can just on/off the autopropagation of that specific segment if it's a segment were (for example, in Spanish) have different genders.
To better illustrate this, when translating patents from English into Spanish, we usually get segments with just the word "wherein", this "wherein" is translated into Spanish depending on the Spanish gender of the subject of the sentence: The claim 1, wherein...= La reivindicación 1, en la que,... (because claim is female in Spanish), BUT The system of the invention, wherein = El sistema de la invención, en el que (because system is male in Spanish). Having this small enhancement, we can easily choose not to propagate this segment as it's almost sure we need to pay special attention to this.
4. Progress bar.
As now, one can use the "Checked" status meaning "Translated", why not to have the choice of showing the progress bar that appears when we have "Automatic update of project statistics" ON but for "Checked" instead of "Translated"? In my workflow, this Progress bar shows "edited" instead of "translated" (aka Checked), so if I have a document that is pretranslated (for example, from MT for postedition) but not translated, this bar will show as 100%, but it's not actually translated. The same occurs with the Progress bar showing our position in the document, in my case it's useless because I know exactly where I am (lol) and it's a useless having this space occupied by something I just don't need.
And this is all by now, folks! :P
About the 3rd point see here. This thing I showed there (to avoid propagation) would also be nice.
tre, indeed! This is actually what I meant :) I didn't realize SmartCat does the same thing.
>I think it could be better if we could have different colors to identify the error instead of having to read it.
Yes, I've requested that too.
>QA Templates. When using "Check all", we could have a little button to load our own QA profile, so that, we don't need to tick/untick the checking we want to apply each time.
I didn't know about Project Templates, I work exclusively with .sdlxliff files, so I just drag&drop and everything works as expected (now I can say CT works perfectly with Trados files, some minor enhancements could be done, like real merging/splitting instead of the virtual one and attributes, but not a big deal), but of course, the "Importing QA template" could be placed wherever it suits better :).
Actually, the QA feature in CT has a huge marge to improve, I still don't understand what "Different translation" means (don't get if it's an inconsistency kind same source = different target OR different translation from the one stored in TM) and small things like these (e.g., it's missing grammar check, measures check... and those are somehow basic tasks a translator needs), but I'm now working with my QA software (Verifika does the trick for me, its SO precise, tuneable and beautiful!) and I'm very surprised with the results, I still find some (specially term related and translation inconsistencies "same source = different target") but I think it's a question of fine tune CT and its Memory/Glossary preferences.
> I work exclusively with .sdlxliff files
It is important to emphasize that there are always lots of application cases.
Concerning grammar check, I recommend CheckMate that can be connected with LanguageTool. The outcome may vary depending on LanguageTool quality in your target language. Maybe one day there will be a kind of interface with CT …
On GNU/Linux, MS Office can be installed and run through Wine (other programs as well).
There are GUI programs that make its use quite easy. For professional use, I recommended CrossOver (PlayOnLinux being a free alternative).
I can also use TransTools and CodeZapper with MS Word. For tags, often CafeTran's MS Word OCR filter is enough.
More info here: https://translateonlinux.org/
Yes, probably WPS Office, it's nice too (as well as SoftMaker Office).
I use LibreOffice for most jobs not related to deliverable files, as I have a proofreading program that interfaces with it. It now offers a hybrid optional "ribbon" view as well.