• State Suggested Answer
  • +1 person also asked this people also asked this
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 436 subscribers
  • Views 6156 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options

Retaining comments from the source file in the target file

Elisa Wenceslá

Hi all,

I have been working on a Word file containing comments. The comments are not for translation but they need to remain in the target version after back conversion.

I prepared the project with the following settings:

I did a pseudotranslation to make sure I would get the result I expected and it worked:

However, after we received the translated document and did the back conversion, all comments have disappeared.

As far as I have checked, the comments from the Word file are processed as Studio comments (in the source column of the prepared sdlxliff). During pseudotranslation, those source comments are duplicated to the target segments (so the comments now appear in the source and the target segments as Studio comments in the sdlxliff). When translating the file, however, the comments are not duplicated in the target, not even when copying the content from the source to the target.

I found this information, so I understand the filter is not working properly in terms of preserving the existing comments not extracted for translation. What I don't quite understand is why it works during the pseudotranslation (duplicating the source comments in the sdlxliff to the target) but not during real translation. That's a problem as you do the pseudotranslation test to make sure something is going to work as you expect but then you don't really get the same result...

I guess we need to use the workaround from the previous link but any thoughts about this? Any intentions to fix this?

Thanks and kind regards,
Rate translation
×
Suggest better translation
×
Moderator UI
×
  • Get AI Suggestion
  • 0
    Hi ,

    I don't quite follow your workflow. Are you sure that the file that was translated was prepared using the option to extract the comments in the first place and that the option to retain them in the target is checked?

    Did you have any other steps you have not mentioned? You mention getting the translated file back... what are you sending out for translation and what comes back? What is the exact flow you are using?

    Thanks

    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

  • 0 in reply to Paul

    Hi Paul,

    As you can see from my screenshot, the comments were not extracted for translation (that option was not checked as they were not to be translated) while the option to retain them in the target is checked.

    And yes, we used the very same project. We did a pseudotranslation test where the comments remained untouched in the target pseudotranslated version but then, when we really translated and converted the very same file, the comments disappeared because of the Studio behavior explained in the workaround link I provided.

    No other workflow added: I prepared the project (I work in the engineering team) and I did the pseudotranslation test to make sure it worked as we expected. The project was then sent to a translator. The translator sent the file back once translated and we converted it back.

    To make sure the translator had used the project I prepared, I also myself translated the source project I had prepared, and when I converted it, the comments had indeed disappeared.

    As explained in my post, it seems like during pseudotranslation, the comments are duplicated both in the source and the target segments in the sdlxliff, and as I had checked the option to retain the target comments, they therefore appear in the back converted file. However, when really translating the file, the comments are not included in the target segments in the sdlxliff and therefore not included in the target converted file.

    This is a dangerous behavior as it seems now that we cannot really trust the pseudotranslation test and that's why I would like to know if there is an explanation for this, please.

    Please let me know in case anything is still not clear.

    Thanks,
  • 0 in reply to Elisa Wenceslá
    This seems to exhibit very similar (if not the same) behavior as during applying PerfectMatch: community.sdl.com/.../14488
  • 0 in reply to Evzen Polenka

    Unknown said:
    This seems to exhibit very similar (if not the same) behavior as during applying PerfectMatch: community.sdl.com/.../14488

    Thanks very much, Evzen Polenka.

    It looks like a lack of consistency in some Studio options/batch tasks. I'm really concerned about the fact that these differences mislead us and affect the outcome compared to the tests...
  • 0 in reply to Paul
    Hi , has there been any fix for this as I am experiencing the exact same issue?

    Thanks,
    Steven Quilty
  • 0 in reply to Steven Quilty
    Hi , has there been any fix or update on this? We keep having the same issue with docx files when comments need to be retained. We are using SDL Studio 2017.

    Thanks,
    Steven Qilty
  • 0

    Hi  and ,
    I just had the same problem. Turns out changes were tracked in the source file, and accepting all changes before running the file through Trados again solved the problem, all source-file comments were maintained in the target. (Though I do check the option "Extract comments for translation," even when I don't need to translate them.)
    emoji