 |
 |
InfoMail,
Q2-2003
GlobalVision International, Inc.
Are Last-Minute Updates Wreaking Havoc With Your Localization Budget?
There’s a very old (and, unfortunately, very true) saying in high tech
that sometimes you have to shoot the developer before a product can be
released to manufacturing. When developers change or add product
functionality at the last minute, Tech Pub writers must scramble to
update the documentation so that it doesn't gate the release. When you
consider that localization is taking place at the same time, the ripple
effect of updating the documents can have international ramifications.
Obviously, once documentation has been released for localization, early
and minimal changes to that documentation can reduce your localization
costs. But what if this is not possible?
The localization process often involves file prep, translation,
linguistic edit (or review), layout or desktop publishing (DTP), and
quality assurance (QA), before docs can be released to printing or
manufacturing. Pre-release changes can occur at any time throughout this
process. The sophistication of the localization methodology, as well as
the Tech Pubs' relationship with the localization group, become
essential in maintaining firm control over quality and cost and
schedules, regardless of when and how often necessary (and inevitable)
updates take place.
To reduce localization costs associated with documentation updates,
consider these suggestions:
•
Once translation has
started, deliver changes to your localization group before the
linguistic edit/review cycle begins. The localization group’s top-down
localization process and translation memory software can be used at the
end of the translation process to leverage already-translated strings in
the newly delivered files. Doing this will reduce the cost of
translating the new or changed material. Review can then proceed as
usual, followed by DTP and QA. Cost and scheduling impact are minimal,
since the process of leveraging from translation is automatic, and the
checking of the leveraging process can still take place during
linguistic edit.
• If minor changes to the source files are delivered after the
linguistic edit has started, the best place to implement them is
directly in the target files during QA. To facilitate bottom-up
localization, provide new source files with revision marks (change bars)
enabled, so that changes are easily identified. This process bypasses
translation memory. The impact on cost and scheduling is minimal, since
the main process remains intact and changes are minor. If desired,
translation memories can also be updated at a later stage to include
important changes.
• If major changes to the source files are delivered after the editing
cycle has started, but before DTP is done, leveraging the translation
from the translation memory is essential, requiring a top-down approach.
At this point, incremental costs should rise in proportion to the
percentage of change, plus include checking of the leveraged text. DTP
and QA charges, however, should not change.
• If major changes to the source files are delivered after layout/DTP,
they can be treated as a new project, requiring the generation of new
project specs, plans, schedules and costs. This is the costliest
scenario possible, prior to committing printing costs, and should be
avoided whenever possible.
Optimal Solution
Given the situations outlined above, the challenge for localization
groups is to facilitate the implementation of change orders, while
minimizing costs and duration of updates. To do so, the following is
necessary:
• A thorough understanding of all available methodologies for top-down,
and bottom-up localization. These methodologies make it possible to
leverage current translations and/or update target files, as needed.
• Use of the best localization tools and techniques available in the
industry. Tools are readily available to enable leveraging of one
paragraph and/or segment at a time, thus minimizing linguistic edits,
layout and QA time and costs.
• Accurate analytical methods to generate localization project
specifications. This makes cost calculation an objective process,
independent of human error.
• Applying proportionate costs to efforts. An honest approach, while
associating efforts to costs, can be accomplished when strong
relationships are built among the involved groups.
In reality, you do not need to shoot your developers to release products
and contain the localization costs associated with last-minute changes.
Establishing a comprehensive process and a strong relationship between
Tech Pubs and localization groups will reduce costs and time to market.
Although a robust localization process may not be a core competency for
a Tech Pubs group, it is a core competency that any localization group
or vendor should have.
|
|