TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I've only just been pulled into this project, and we're at the final
stages. It turns out that we did come up with a term bank/glossary when we
started, but I haven't seen it yet. My main worry at this point is that
we're on a tight schedule with a looming target date. And I know that
without appropriate guidance some reviewers will want to rewrite
everything, while others will focus on finding lots of small changes
because they think that's what they're supposed to do. And I don't know
the product or this doc set well enough to be able to help much with
determining which changes might be necessary and which are just stylistic.
I've found a few short articles and blog posts about in-country
localization reviews on the web. But nothing I could point our team
towards and say, "This is what we should be doing." So today I'm trying to
write up a couple of short bullet points about what we want reviewers to
focus on. I appreciate everyone's input, it has been very helpful.
This list has always been awesome about sharing your knowledge. Thanks
everyone!
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Kat Kuvinka <katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com>wrote:
> Bill has great advice. IMHO, with localization experience at just one job,
> this can be tough. I had to be a negotiator between the translation company
> and the in-country reviewer. It was probably the hardest part of the
> project. Who is more "right"? Who understands the product or service better?
>
> It is up to you to decide whether or not a change is worth being made. I
> got some "this doesn't make sense" from the in-country review. Just
> remember to keep track of all suggestions made by your reviewers so the
> translation company is aware. It will be easier after the first round.
>
> Did you get a glossary translation? The reviewers should be aware of how
> any specialized terminology has been translated. For example, if you are in
> the medical field, your in-country reviewers should be given he
> definitions for the translated terms. They might disagree with these, also.
>
> I wish I could be more helpful, but to ensure quality this is an important
> and painful step. Are people do less localization? Used to be more of a hot
> topic...
>
> Kathee
>
>
> >
> > They should note the technical accuracy of the translation, phrases that
> > don't make sense, ensure proper use of terminology within context, etc.
> As
> > with any source language review, they should avoid any preferential
> changes
> > unless they have a compelling case to make them. They should also look at
> > appropriateness of layout, imagery, and color.
> >
> > Any reviews should be sent back to the translators and changes should be
> > make within the TM so they can be leveraged going forward (otherwise
> you're
> > paying for the same fix twice).
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Julie Stickler <jstickler -at- gmail -dot- com
> >wrote:
> >
> > > We're in the middle of our first localization effort, and we're about
> ready
> > > to have our team in the target country review the translations. And it
> > > occurs to me, while I've written up "How to be a Good Reviewer"
> > > instructions for technical reviewers, I haven't done the same sort of
> thing
> > > for reviewers who are reviewing for translation quality vs. technical
> > > accuracy.
> > >
> > > Anyone have a set of tips, articles, or favorite blog posts with tips?
> Of
> > > course, since we're talking translated content, we don't want our
> reviewers
> > > making unnecessary revisions in the doc, so I'd really like to provide
> some
> > > guidance to our team.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Julie Stickler
> > > http://heratech.wordpress.com/
> > > Blogging about Agile and technical writing
> > >
> > >
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for
> > > authoring.
> > >
> > > Learn more: http://bit.ly/ZeOZeQ
> > >
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > >
> > > You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as techcommdood -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > > techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> > >
> > >
> > > Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> > > http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources
> and
> > > info.
> > >
> > > Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our
> online
> > > magazine at http://techwhirl.com
> > >
> > > Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> > > email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Bill Swallow
> > Writing and Content Strategy Consultant
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/techcommdood
> >
> >
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for
> authoring.
> >
> > Learn more: http://bit.ly/ZeOZeQ
> >
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com -dot-
>
> >
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> >
> >
> > Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> > http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources
> and info.
> >
> > Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our
> online magazine at http://techwhirl.com
> >
> > Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
>
