Best Apps for Facilitating Document LocalizationThis article was originally published on the Acclaro blog.

Category: Documents, Localization Tips

Last week Acclaro held a webinar on the basics of technical document localization. We touched

on a lot of areas in document translation, including how to write in Global English, best

practices for images, and an overview of the document localization process. 

One burning question many people have concerns file formats and desktop applications —

specifically, what they can do to make the localization process easier.

First, let's just note that if you aren't using XML, you should! XML is by far the best file format for

localizers to work with on large documentation projects:

XML and to a lesser extent HTML (it's not as customizable) are great tools to use for document

localization. Formatting is embedded in code that typically gets externalized during the

translation process. Because of this the engineering end is lighter as it's less likely to have the

same problems as MS Word, FrameMaker, InDesign or Quark. With most XML projects, we've

seen that the client remains in control of their docs. Acclaro will execute a quick QA, but once

prepped and translated, the bulk of our work is done. What does that mean for you? Fewer

costs!

Page 1: Best Apps for Facilitating Document Localization Copyright © Acclaro 2012

The biggest selling point to XML, however, is that you can create a variety of outputs from a

single source — with print docs/PDFs and user assistance, etc., only being localized once and

then output to whatever end product you want. That's the kind of freedom you're going to want

in the long run.

Sounds pretty good, right? But what about desktop publishing platforms? We asked our resident

expert on desktop publishing and localization to tell you about the various applications out

there. Here is his opinion...

First, InDesign towers over Quark, Pagemaker (is that still around?) and various other programs

of this type. It is mostly used for very colorful pieces with a heavier concentration on the design

element, rather than text. A few years back when InDesign was in its infancy it blew Quark out

of the water with its ability to handle a variety of languages in one doc. Quark did catch up with

that technology. InDesign managed to keep the lead, however, as it is owned by Adobe, which

also makes the industry standard tools Photoshop, Illustrator and Flash. These tools simply work

better together and though this may not be from a strictly localization perspective, it is from

an operations perspective.

I might sound like a dinosaur when I say this, but I would like to give praise to FrameMaker —

particularly over MS Word. The pre-translation process might be a bit heavier, but FrameMaker

is a great program that gives the user much more control over its main competitor MS Word as

well as others. Its automation features enhance the DTP process, making for quicker fixes and

quicker QAs. Also, FrameMaker can be output not only to doc quite fluidly, but with the aid of

ePublisher (WebWorks) you can also create help systems — HTML and XML, etc. MS Word can

also be converted but the end product is not as good and sometimes there is more clean up

once you get there.

Any specifics of why InDesign is better than Quark today, other than its integration

with other Adobe products?

Mostly now it is just perception that Adobe has greater language support. They both do the

same thing. They have similar issues: for example, publishing in Arabic both require Middle

Eastern versions. Both have exports that work with various versions of the translation memory

tool Trados. Adobe has been a bit more aggressive with its innovation — though most of this is

the result of the more fluid interaction between their other flagship products.

InDesign was quicker to ride the Mac OS change and incorporate these benefits in their

products. Prior to OSX and InDesign, you needed a separate version of Quark for each Asian

language (as well as language-specific operating systems for each). This is no longer the case,

but it took Quark up until their current version (Quark 8) to really offer full language support

(Arabic/Hebrew excluded).

Page 2: Best Apps for Facilitating Document Localization Copyright © Acclaro 2012

Lastly, some people argue that Adobe has become more user friendly, but this is really just

personal preference.

So there you have it! Everything you would ever want to know about desktop publishing

applications and how they relate to localization. Ready for more tips? Check out our Top 10

Tips for Technical Document Translation.

About Acclaro: Acclaro is an international translation and localization company that helps the world’s leading brands succeed across cultures. We translate websites, marketing campaigns, documents and software to give clients an authentic voice in key language markets.

North America: 1-866-468-5106 Worldwide: +1-914-468-0222 www.acclaro.com sales@acclaro.com

Page 3: Best Apps for Facilitating Document Localization Copyright © Acclaro 2012