by Jennifer O Neill
I oversee the localisation of my company’s video and an important part of the localisation process is the in-country review. This is where the translated material is sent to an individual in the target country to do a linguistic review. The in-country review plays an important role in ensuring the quality of the translated documentation. So it’s important to carefully plan for this stage.
Who should do the reviews
A good reviewer is a
- Company employee
- Native speaker of the target language
- Product SME
- Stakeholder in the process of producing quality translated documentation
In my company, we usually send the translations for review to a technical support colleague in one of our many sales offices located across Europe. Sometimes the sales people also help. What they all have in common is that they know the products, are mother-tongue in the language being reviewed, and know the customer so want documentation that helps them. Quality matters to them. Well written and translated documentation helps reduce the number of calls they receive from customers.
Develop localisation guidelines
Before the localisation project starts, you should work with your localisation vendor to develop localisation guidelines. The guidelines, a localisation style guide, will help the translators know how you want the text translated. It can include such information as fonts to use for specific languages, how to handle text that is not translated, stylistic issues. As the in-country reviewers are often the final judges of the quality of the localised documentation get their input in these guidelines so that they and the localisation vendor agree on standards. This joint effort will help minimise the number of revisions later.
Although many reviewers have in-depth knowledge of the product, they may not know how to review a translated document. It’s therefore important that you provide them with a clear set of guidelines or instructions to ensure consistent and timely feedback from them. It can be a simple list of do’s and don’t on a single page. Some guideline examples are
- Use approved terminology in your review (and use it consistently)
- Don’t try to rewrite the document
- Check that decimal and measurements notation is appropriate for your region or language
- Try to ensure that the same person reviews each translation project for consistency
- Mark your requested changes in the correct format (Track Changes for Word files or comments for PDF files)
- Contact the person overseeing the translation project if you have any concerns about the document content or translation quality
Don’t forget multilingual glossaries
We work with our in-country reviewers to develop our multilingual glossaries as some of our terminology is industry specific and we want to ensure it is translated correctly. These multilingual glossaries have more terms and acronyms in them than the English-only glossary used by our technical writers.
The localisation vendor SDL recently conducted an online survey which found that 36% of respondents stored their English terminology in a style guide, 33% in spreadsheets, and that 24% had no terminology list. I suspect that those respondents without terminology lists were not localising their documentation. However, if you are serious about quality in any language you must have a glossary of terms and acronyms. If you don’t have one for use during localisation, and don’t have in-country reviewers to help you develop one, your localisation vendor will be able to help you do one. Translators need approved translated terminology.
The reviewer’s changes
The translated document can be sent to the reviewer in different formats. It depends on what you’ve agreed with your localisation vendor. The most common file formats used for reviews are Word and PDF. Whichever format is used, the reviewer needs to clearly understand how to mark their changes in the file and why it’s important that the translator can easily see what changes have been made. This information will be included in your reviewing guidelines to them.
Their changes are then manually implemented from the Word or PDF file into the translation database by the translator. If there are many changes, this can take time. And if there are many changes, you need to find out why from the reviewer in order to reduce rework in later projects. Was it a poor translation, stylistic differences between the reviewer and the translator, or a new reviewer who has different expectations from the previous reviewer? Were some of the changes due to errors in the content of the document? If so, you need to know how to handle content errors at this stage in the localisation process.
A common problem with in-country reviewing is the late review. In-country reviewers have daytime jobs too to do. Reviewing translations is just one item on their long task list. Sending them a 300-page translation of a new product’s documentation to review in a week is often unrealistic. Review schedules need to be realistic yet fit in with the product release deadlines. Get to know your reviewers so that you know when potential delays may occur such as when they’re on holiday, attending trade shows, giving customer trainings. You can then plan the review schedule accordingly, perhaps even calling on the assistance of another reviewer if necessary. All the while keep working on updating your multilingual glossaries and fine tuning the localisation style guide so that translation quality continually improves.
Increasingly localisation vendors are developing online review tools that allow the in-country reviewer to review the translated text via the Web, which means no firewall problems and their changes are implemented immediately into the translation memory, saving time and streamlining the process. The translator no longer has to spend time transferring the changes from a marked up PDF, for example, to the translation memory. The reviewer is still provided with an English PDF of the manual in order to see how the text appears in the document. However, such online tools aren’t free. For example, one large localisation vendor charges around 100 euros a month per reviewer for their Web-based online review tool.
Become a close team
By planning ahead for in-country reviews you can help ensure that the translated documentation you release in the international market meets the expectations and needs of your customers.
Tags: guidelines, localisation, multilingual, planning, reviewing, translations
The 2010 STC Board of Directors Election is scheduled to run from 9 March 2010 to 8 April 2010. STC members are eligible to vote if they renew by 28 February 2010. Student members are not eligible to vote in Society-level elections, but they are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the candidates. It may be an inspiration for future opportunities in the Society!
Candidate materials and bios will be available on the STC website in early January 2010. This post is a reminder about the upcoming elections – and possibly a reminder to renew your STC membership.
Who are the Candidates
The following information is provided by Jackie Damrau, Manager, Nominating Committee. Feel free to contact Jackie if you have any questions: jdamrau3 at airmail.net.
Please note that the election slate presented below reflects changes to the composition of the Society Board of Directors. Based on the results of the Knowledge-based Governance Survey of the membership conducted in August 2009, the STC Board of Directors voted during its 24 August 2009 meeting to amend the Society Bylaws to reflect the following position changes:
- Remove the Second Vice President position
- Remove one Director position
- Change Director terms to two years
- Allow Directors to serve two consecutive terms
A full copy of the revised bylaws is posted on the STC website.
Congratulations to all of the candidates, and thanks to everyone who expressed interest in running for office.
- For President: Mike Hughes will automatically succeed from First Vice President.
- For First Vice President: Hillary Hart will automatically succeed from Second Vice President.
Candidates on the slate for the 2010 STC election:
- For Secretary: Rachel Houghton and Steven Jong
- For Director (three positions to be elected)* Nicky Bleiel, Al Hood, Tricia Spayer, Makarand (Mak) Pandit, and W.C. Wiese
*Lisa Pappas resigned from the STC Board effective 23 November 2009, which creates an additional position for someone to serve the one year remaining in her term. For the 2010 election, STC members will elect three directors-at-large, with the top two winners serving the two-year terms and the third winner serving the remaining year of Lisa’s term.- For Nominating Committee (two positions to be elected): Lory Hawkes, Nathaniel Lim, Linda Mikkelsen, and Preeti Mathur
What individual STC members can do
- Ask the candidate a question. The STC Web site will provide a “Question and Answer” area where individual members can post a question for all candidates for a position. All candidates for an elected position will receive the question by email and have the opportunity to post an answer. (The page is STC Board Election, but it is not updated at the time of this post.)
- Endorse a candidate. As an individual member, you may endorse a particular candidate on Twitter, the STC Ideas Ning site, the STC LinkedIn group, or your own personal blog. (NOTE: Group endorsement of a candidate by a community, chapter, or committee is not allowed. E-mail lists that are administered through the Society office and subscribed to based on an elected position in a community, such as the Presidents’ list or Treasurers’ list, are not appropriate venues for endorsements from individual members.)
The elections page will include each candidate’s statement and personal URL for additional information about the candidate.
Note that candidates are permitted to contact individuals personally in addition to providing campaign information on their own personal Web sites. The STC office may also send out (maximum) two campaign messages per candidate through Society e-mail to those who have opted for Society mail.
Tags: candidates, elections, STC Board
by Jennifer O Neill
Although my focus at work is producing documentation for the EMA market (Europe, Middle East and Africa), it’s always interesting to learn about what’s happening in other regional markets. At the 2009 tekom conference in Weisbaden, Germany, a speaker from the Japan Technical Communication Association gave a presentation on frequent problems encountered in the Japanese market with manuals written in Europe.
A frequent problem is that of non-compliance with national standards, such as those related to safety. As EU directives are an important legal issue for the European targeted manuals that we do in my company, I can well understand the importance of complying with Japanese requirements. It is also important to clearly state when information in the manual does not apply to Japan. Around 70% of Japanese people read the manuals when they buy a product. Since 2007, product accidents are now publicly reported in the press.
Another problem encountered is that of using English terms in translated manuals or doing a phonetic translation where the English sound is preserved but the meaning lost. Translations for the Chinese market must use approved terms.
Recently a consumer magazine in Japan conducted a survey of its readers, asking them what were the most important items they wanted when using printed product manuals. The top 10 answers were
- Larger font size
- More illustrations and visual explanations
- Fewer pages
- Friendly explanations for beginners
- Fewer foreign terms used in the text
- Easy-to-use instructions
- Fewer technical terms
- Better explanations for elderly users (Japan has an ageing population)
- Clearer separation between basic functions and advanced ones
- Manual has a table of contents and an index
The desires of readers seem similar worldwide.
Tags: compliance, Japan Technical Communication Association, national standards, translation
by Jennifer O Neill
At the 2009 tekom conference in Weisbaden, Germany, Scott DeLoach of ClickStart Inc. gave an excellent overview of what research has found on the usability of user assistance. Research has found that
- Users prefer Arial over Verdana and Tahoma. The two latter fonts were developed for onscreen reading. People tend not to do extensive reading on-screen.
TNR scored the same as Verdana when reading short texts.
Many users have problems reading on-screen text that is below 10 point. Older users prefer text to be 12/14 point. - Users don’t like scrolling. They prefer to read a screen than scroll down it to find the information.
- Users want quick answers. They focus on minimizing effort rather than maximizing learning. “Easy to find” ranked higher than “Correct information”. They are focused on completing a task.
Users scan information; they don’t read long sentences. Limit sentences to 20 words. - Novices use introductions to remember information and build knowledge. However, experts are frustrated by overviews. Experts scan for procedures, notes, and tips.
Consequently don’t put technical information in overviews.
Users learn from examples so FAQs are very popular.
Linking guidelines
- Users spend up to 80% of their time in the first screen. Many prefer to move to another screen than to scroll down. Therefore don’t put links at the bottom of a screen.
Preferably place links in the right margin of a screen. - Use text links rather than image links. This is mainly because they change color when clicked. Text is also easier to customize that an image.
- Use links that are descriptive. Don’t simply say “Help”. Instead, for example, say “How do I …”, “Quick tips” ….
You can find more information on this topic at http://www.clickstart.net/?page_id=8
Tags: best practice, typography, usability, user assistance
A rendezvous with content strategy in Paris in the springtime – it’s the stuff dreams are made of! (Well, for technical communicators, at least!)
Mark 15-16 April 2010 on your calendars for the Content Strategy Forum 2010. It’s “where business analysis meets user experience and content development”. Will you be there, too?
The program and registration information reveals a rather dazzling lineup of workshops, presentations, and discussions led by leading experts and practitioners from the emerging field of Content Strategy.
We’ll try to keep up with the news here, but we also recommend that you subscribe to articles from STC France and follow news coming from the @stcfrance Twitter account. They’ll sharpen your appetite for an exciting forum in April!
Tags: conference, content strategy, Content Strategy Forum, csforum10, stc france, workshops
It’s renewal time in STC (and the SIG). Here’s a page of practical information about renewing your STC membership (and a handy “Renew Now!” button).
Do you have a colleague or friend who is not a member? Share this page of practical information about joining STC for the first time.
Existing members feeling the financial pinch should look at the STC recovery package offered by the Society.
If you’re torn between buying some software and paying for your membership, Madcap has a tempting offer – paying for your membership!
We hope to see you in STC in 2010!
Tags: membership, renewal, STC
The call has gone out. From now until Monday, October 5, at 10 AM ET, you can submit your proposals for the STC’s Technical Communication Summit 2010.
You may submit more than one proposal, but each must be submitted separately at www.softconference.com/subs/stc/2010/.
The Summit will be held 2–5 May 2010 at the Hyatt Regency Dallas in Dallas, TX.
The logo for the STC 2010 Technical Summit
Questions and contacts
For general information or questions about the system, contact Lloyd Tucker, Director of Education and Membership, at lloyd.tucker@stc.org or via telephone at +1 (571) 366-1904.
For questions about your proposal content or format, contact a Track Manager. Their contact information is available through the call for proposals link. Here’s a quick overview:
- Conference chair: Alan Houser (@arh)
- Program chair: Rachel Houghton (@rjhoughton)
- Web Technologies, Emerging Technologies, and Education & Training tracks: Track Manager Paul Mueller (@useraid) – also Deputy Program Chair
- Design, Architecture, and Publishing: Track Manager Sarah O’Keefe, (@sarahokeefe)
- Managing People, Projects, and Business: Track Manager Richard Hamilton (@richardhamilton)
- Usability and Accessibility: Track Manager Caroline Jarrett
- Writing and Editing: Track Manager Kathryn Poe
- Professional Development and Communication/Interpersonal Skills tracks: Track Manager Ant Davey (@antdavey)
- Academic & Research Topics: Topic Mgr Charlie Kostelnick (Note: There is no academic track for the STC 2010 Summit. The programming committee seeks academic and research-based proposals in all tracks.)
If you are on Twitter, follow @stc2010 for the latest news about the 2010 STC Technical Summit!
Tags: 2010 STC Summit, call for proposals, dallas, technical summit, Technical Summit 2010
We’re on the radio! Our profession, that is. Today, August 21, the beeb (BBC Radio 4) is presenting a half-hour documentary on instruction manuals at 11:00am (London time). One of the interviewees is Simon Butler, President of the ISTC.
If you are not able to tune in on the BBC at that time, you can listen to the podcast that will be made.
We also recommend reading the article David Farbey wrote about this show.
He writes:
Technical writers (…) simply don’t get enough exposure, and this is the sort of publicity that we, as a profession, desperately need. (…) I hope that this programme will raise awareness that there is a profession of technical writing, and that there are professional technical writers who not only enjoy writing the instructions, but are actually pretty good at what they do.
After the show, share your comments here, on David’s blog, or on the Ning site for our SIG (requires SIG membership).
Tags: bbc, profession, technical writing
Do you know about the STC (beta) site for finding speakers? It’s at http://findaspeaker.stc.org/.
Despite the current discussion about STC’s financial crisis, this is an excellent initiative that deserves support. The site definitely needs data, and only you can help provide that data. Add your name – or share with the people who should be in this database.
Currently, there are no listings for people in Europe. Case in point! We need the names of speakers based in Europe to add to the diversity of this database. Spread the word. Let’s make STC truly international!
Around the world
Of course, we are promoting the European angle. After all, we are the Europe SIG. We would definitely encourage speakers located outside North America and Europe to contribute to the database. Spread the word to colleagues in Russia, Africa, South America, Australia/New Zealand, all of Asia – everywhere.
Remember your speaker tips!
Wherever you speak, please consider all the people attending your presentation. I’m talking about those attendees who are hard-of-hearing. You do want everyone to hear what you have to say, right? The AccessAbility SIG of STC has a nice cheat sheet for you to use.
HCI fans might like a good excuse for a trip to the northern corner of our SIG world: Sweden. Uppsala, Sweden to be precise. That is where INTERACT 2009, the 12th IFIP conference on Human-Computer interaction (HCI), takes place from the 24th to the 28th of August.
The conference theme is research and practice:
The theme of the INTERACT 2009 conference, Research and Practice, addresses the issue of continuity between theory and practice in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research. The main focus is on research that is reflected in real-world applications.
The INTERACT series of conferences has been one of the driving forces in the HCI field for many years, and over time much research has been published in the INTERACT Conference proceedings. In Scandinavia, where INTERACT will be held in 2009, the HCI research tradition has always had a strong connection to working life, and the aim to produce practical assets for software design has been an important research issue. But how does research relate to practice in 2009? Are research results spreading beyond the research community and applied in practice, and are practitioners looking into research for their answers?
The relation between theory and practice is an old issue that is becoming increasingly important. Has HCI been able to contribute to better IT use in practice? Are the existing methods and tools for the design of usable systems sufficient or is there still a need for new and better processes, methods and tools for systems development? INTERACT 2009 provides a forum in which practitioners and researchers can discuss research and methods for mutual benefit.
Find out whether there truly is a special angle to HCI in Scandinavia. The INTERACT 2009 conference site has all the practical details ready for you. Enjoy!
Tags: HCI, IFIP, INTERACT, INTERACT09