Studio and Trados Live entry structure setup not compatible with MultiTerm Convert

I went to MultiTerm Convert to set up an entry structure, using an Excel file containing glossary:

SDL MultiTerm Convert window showing entry structure setup with 'Usage' and 'Source' under English term and 'Note-ZH' under Chinese term.

Then I went to Trados LIve to create a new termbase, using the .xdt file generated by MultiTerm Convert as termbase structure:

Trados Live New Termbase Wizard showing fields and structure with 'Usage' and 'Source' under English term and missing 'Note-zh' under Chinese term.

Then I imported the same Excel file into the new termbase:

Import termbase window in Trados Live with mismatched fields showing 'Note-en' under both English and Chinese terms and missing 'Note-zh' field.

It seemed like Trados Live did not understand or unable to properly read the structural setup I made in MultiTerm Convert. For example, I didn't want "Usage" and "Source" fields under the English term level, and "Note-zh" field was missing under the Chinese term level.



Generated Image Alt-Text
[edited by: Trados AI at 1:51 PM (GMT 0) on 5 Mar 2024]
emoji
  • It is a bit complicated to explain and I like the depth you are going into here... haven't seen this many questions around how to work with Multiterm for a very long time!

    First of all, and  can correct me if I'm wrong, when you add new fields at the term level they always apply to all languages in the definition even if you use MT Convert and specify otherwise.  This applies to MultiTerm and also to Language Cloud.  So if you do this in MT Convert:

    Screenshot of Trados Studio showing entry structure with tags at entry level and terms with notes in English and Chinese at term level.

    It will look like this in MultiTerm:

    Image of entry structure in Trados Studio with tags at entry level and term level details including notes in English and Chinese.

    Similarly it will look the same in Language Cloud as you have discovered.  In MultiTerm you have additional capabilities to control how these are used.  So for example, I can create a custom Layout that will always only show what I want and in the order I want:

    Trados Studio Termbase Manager interface with a red arrow pointing to the 'Input Models' section in the navigation pane.

    Mine now looks like this (changed background colour, defined the order and what actually displays irrespective of what entries I have):

    Trados Studio term entry showing English and Chinese terms with notes, usage, and source information for the term 'cat'.

    I can also create an input model to control what is allowable when adding new terms:

    Trados Studio Termbase Manager with a red arrow indicating the selection of an input model named 'MyInput'.

    Looks like this when I add a new one (exactly as you'd prefer to see):

    Trados Studio term entry interface with empty fields for English and Chinese terms, notes, usage, and source.

    So... all good so far.  But when it comes to using the new "Default Layout" in MultiTerm or the new Language Cloud Terminology, none of these things are possible.  You can only control the order of the layout and what can be added if you are using the older MultiTerm technology.

    I guess  might be able to tell you what plans we have for improving this in the future, but for now I hope this explains why you can't do what you have attempted?  Or she'll explain why I'm completely wrong... which would be good :-)

    Paul Filkin | RWS Group

    ________________________
    Design your own training!

    You've done the courses and still need to go a little further, or still not clear? 
    Tell us what you need in our Community Solutions Hub

    emoji


    Generated Image Alt-Text
    [edited by: Trados AI at 1:52 PM (GMT 0) on 5 Mar 2024]
  • Thank you Paul for your explanation. The sample termbase you made was funny.

    Just wanted to point out that in my example, the Note-zh field was missing altogether in the new termbase.

    I thought what I wanted to was pretty straightforward, but looks like it's another rabbit hole...