Hello @Pavel Tsvetkov ,

Maybe you will find this app helpful

https://appstore.sdl.com/language/app/rapid-add-term/1050/

Hi Steven,

Thank you for your suggestion.

I have this app installed, but using it can create problems. Namely, the app does not check for duplicates, etc. and will add the term directly.

Over time, this will result in in multiple repeated terms in the TB.

Best regards,

Pavel 

Pavel Tsvetkov

Pavel Tsvetkov said:

I have this app installed, but using it can create problems. Namely, the app does not check for duplicates, etc. and will add the term directly.

You should make sure you have the latest version.  I'm sure it does not do this and works in the same way as the ootb add term in this regard.

Hi Paul,

1. Rapid Add Term will only warn you in those cases when the exact same source term exists in the TB with the exact same translation. If the source term exists with a different translation, or if the translation exists with a different source term, it will add the new member to the corresponding existing pair without letting you know.

2. That is not always optimal, as in those cases when the existing pair contains two or more source terms paired to two or more translations, then there is no way of telling if adding another source term or another translation to those complex correlations would equal a true translation before first checking it.

3. Also worth noting is that after addind a new term or translation to an exising pair using Rapid Add Term, the term recognition window is not refereshed, so there is not way to tell what exactly has happened.

4. What we need is that we get a warning in those cases when either source or target already exists (Trados does it), but without the 42+ seconds of waiting. Plus, in the cases under item 3 above, we need the term recognition window to auto-refresh and show where the new term or translation has been added.

5. Why can't there be a native solution that works quicker? Why can an add-on do in a second what Trados does in 42+ seconds?

Best regards,

Pavel

Have you tried to set the termbase viewer to a fixed window?

Hi Jerzy,

What do you mean by a fixed window? I have disabled the autohide feature of the window, but there is no difference.

Best regards,

Pavel

Pavel Tsvetkov said:

Why can't there be a native solution that works quicker? Why can an add-on do it and Trados cannot?

The add-on does it because it doesn't spend any time having to check these things across the database, or render any updated information in a view window.  All the things that Trados does, that you want, we removed!

So that's why we're quicker with the add-on and it serves a purpose for anyone wanting to simply quickly add terms.  Probably one way to work is with a new termbase, and just add terms quickly without any of these checks, and then when you are done import them into your proper termbase where you have some controls over how to handle duplicates.

There is no doubt that MultiTerm is frustrating... but in order for this to behave better its needs some fundamental changes to several decades of how this terminology technology works.  The reason it hasn't happened yet is sadly all down to priorities and since "most" users don't work with really large terminology resources (yes of course there are exceptions) the sort of changes and fresh thinking needed have only taken place in the cloud so far.

There is a solution from RyS in the AppStore that is really fast, but it has unfortunately not been implemented as a proper Terminology provider so it is a little more clunky to use in some respects... but it is blazing fast.  Maybe Michael Beijer can give you some advice on working with this as an alternative as he has some really massive terminology resources that he manages through this plugin.

Yes, this is exactly what I meant. It's strange, because in my video you can see, that adding a term is indeed very fast. When I have the window put to auto hide, it takes much longer.

Although the RyS plugin does work way better than the built in version, or the new RAT workaround, I'm actually using a different CAT tool (written by a single man, and which can run circles around Studio in its terminology handling) again as I couldn't handle the aggravation anymore. As usual, every few months, or even years sometimes, I check back to see if any improvements have been made to Studio, in the areas that matter to me (terminology, and a previewer that actually works with stealing focus from the target editor), but so far it has been a pretty depressing experience. 

Given the resources I would assume a company like SDL has at its disposal (unless they're paying certain people higher up too much, or doing something else really wrong), I'd say it might be time to start developing a Trados Studio v2 (in parallel with the crusty old current version of course), based on fresh technology, and let us power users test it in beta until it is ready to take the place of the current rather crappy version. If Wordfast could so it (develop completely new versions based on different technology), why can’t SDL?

Although the RyS plugin does work way better than the built in version, or the new RAT workaround, I'm actually using a different CAT tool (written by a single man, and which can run circles around Studio in its terminology handling) again as I couldn't handle the aggravation anymore. As usual, every few months, or even years sometimes, I check back to see if any improvements have been made to Studio, in the areas that matter to me (terminology, and a previewer that actually works with stealing focus from the target editor), but so far it has been a pretty depressing experience. 

Given the resources I would assume a company like SDL has at its disposal (unless they're paying certain people higher up too much, or doing something else really wrong), I'd say it might be time to start developing a Trados Studio v2 (in parallel with the crusty old current version of course), based on fresh technology, and let us power users test it in beta until it is ready to take the place of the current rather crappy version. If Wordfast could so it (develop completely new versions based on different technology), why can’t SDL?

Well Michael Beijer... not exactly the question I asked you, but thank you.

Michael Beijer said:

written by a single man

This tells me all I need to know about your knowledge of software development ;-)

ha ha. I know hardly any program's code in its entirety is written by one and the same person (unless it's a lowly AHK script), since a tool written in e.g. Java, is basically a big collection of modules, or classes, or whatever they're called, which were written by others. but I do know that this single person basically single-handedly created, improves and maintains his tool, whereas SDL has a whole team, or I at least assume there are a few of them. it's just very hard to fathom just how terrible some of Studio's basic functionality is. I know, you keep telling us about the decades of legacy crap, etc., but that excuse only goes so far. after a while, 5 years? 10 years? 20 years??? … it ought to be possible to fix basic broken or missing functionality. I mean, seriously:

1. a previewer that has never really been fit for purpose
2. a terminology system that is basically a royal pain in the ass to actually use (at least from inside Studio), and just doesn't work as it should way too often
3. etc.

Anyway, no biggie. I'll just get back to my other CAT tool, and occasionally pop back to see if you guys have something compelling to offer.