Hi Paul Filkin,

I generally agree with your replies, comments and I appreciate your valuable suggestions, but this time I really do not fully understand.

Claire pointed out a possible issue regarding SDL Multiterm Converter 2017 and you, as usual, asked to receive the source file to examine it to find a possible problem inside the file itself, and this is good. To be clear, I am (and have been) regularly working using SDL MultiTerm Converter and I did not find any substantial issue.

But, In this particular case, what I consider hard to share with you is your suggestion (and this is not the first time, as I remember) to carry out the task using a plug-in, i.e. Glossary Converter, because it is easier to work with.

First of all, it is a valuable external plug-in developed by an external developer, while MultiTerm Converter has always been integrated (and installed) with SDL MultiTerm.

Avoiding any polemic spirit, the spontaneous question is:
If you at SDL deem that Glossary Converter is easier, and sometimes better, then MultiTerm Converter, why do you not directly integrate Glossary Converter into SDL MultiTerm in place of MultiTerm Converter?

Thank you and, plese, forgive my plain speaking… I didn’t mean to offend anyone.

Claudio

Hi Paul Filkin,

I generally agree with your replies, comments and I appreciate your valuable suggestions, but this time I really do not fully understand.

Claire pointed out a possible issue regarding SDL Multiterm Converter 2017 and you, as usual, asked to receive the source file to examine it to find a possible problem inside the file itself, and this is good. To be clear, I am (and have been) regularly working using SDL MultiTerm Converter and I did not find any substantial issue.

But, In this particular case, what I consider hard to share with you is your suggestion (and this is not the first time, as I remember) to carry out the task using a plug-in, i.e. Glossary Converter, because it is easier to work with.

First of all, it is a valuable external plug-in developed by an external developer, while MultiTerm Converter has always been integrated (and installed) with SDL MultiTerm.

Avoiding any polemic spirit, the spontaneous question is:
If you at SDL deem that Glossary Converter is easier, and sometimes better, then MultiTerm Converter, why do you not directly integrate Glossary Converter into SDL MultiTerm in place of MultiTerm Converter?

Thank you and, plese, forgive my plain speaking… I didn’t mean to offend anyone.

Claudio

Unknown said:

If you at SDL deem that Glossary Converter is easier, and sometimes better, then MultiTerm Converter, why do you not directly integrate Glossary Converter into SDL MultiTerm in place of MultiTerm Converter?

This is an easy one to answer Claudio.  Because we do not own this application!

In addition, whilst it is a great tool it doesn't completely replace MultiTerm Convert as there are things that sophisticated terminologists use in their termbases that the glossary converter does not support.  So it's not as simple as replace one for another.  But for most usecases by translators it is by far the better solution.  I didn't get the files to test, and I would have liked to see them as MultiTerm Convert should be able to handle them so it would be interesting to see why not; although I'd be surprised if we did a lot of work on that tool now to improve it given the move towards cloud computing and the introduction of terminology in the cloud for everyone.  The cloud solution can import a spreadsheet directly, so we are heading in a new direction there.

Regards

Paul