1 / 22

XLIFF in a large-scale international OECD study

XLIFF in a large-scale international OECD study. Case study Britta Upsing, Steve Dept, Andrea Ferrari, Heiko Rölke. Overview. Background Information: The PIAAC Study Test creation and Translation Process Overview of process Translation and Adaptation Tools

tyrone-savage
Download Presentation

XLIFF in a large-scale international OECD study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. XLIFF in a large-scale international OECD study Case study Britta Upsing, Steve Dept, Andrea Ferrari, Heiko Rölke

  2. Overview • Background Information: The PIAAC Study • Test creation and Translation Process • Overview of process • Translation and Adaptation Tools • User experience: Challenges and lessons learnt

  3. Programme for International Assessment of Adult Competencies Target Population: non-institutionalized adults aged 16 to 64 27 participating countries 35 national versions 26 languages Very brief introduction to PIAAC

  4. Goals and Scope • Goal: “(PIAAC) will assess the level and distribution of adult skills across countries, focusing on the cognitive and workplace skills needed for successful participation in today's work environment.“ (OECD) • Means: Computer or paper-based tests and a computer-based background questionnaire • Scope: at least 5000 completed cases (test takers) per country • Project Timeline: 2008 – 2013

  5. The cognitive tests - computer- or paper-based tests to measure literacy and numeracy skills - computer-based test to measure how well participants solve problems using computers.

  6. Example: Computer-based item

  7. Overview • Background Information: The PIAAC Study • Test creation and Translation Process • Overview of process • Translation and Adaptation Tools • User experience: Challenges and lessons learnt

  8. Test creation and translation process Tests to be comparable across language versions -> “Master versions” developed centrally, translation in countries • Translators should not change the layout • Layout should be separated from translation -> XLIFF generated from item descriptions

  9. Item production and translation process 3/5 How much…? ◄ ? ► Web-based Translationportal 3/5 Combien de …? ◄ ? ► 3/5 Separation of content and text Hoeveel …? XLIFF XLIFF ◄ ? ► 3/5 Translation/Reconciliationtool (OLT)‏ Wie viele …? ◄ ? ► Offline test authoring tool (xliff 1.1 generated from item descriptions)

  10. Translation Process • Web-based Portal for Translation Country1_Language1 Country1_Language2 Translation & Reconciliation Translation & Reconciliation • More than 30,000 archived XLIFF files • Several hundreds of thousands temporary XLIFF files • 60 translators, 30 reconcilers, 30 verifiers…. Scoring Adaptation Scoring Adaptation Verification Verification Layout Adaptation Layout Adaptation Final Check….. Final Check…… Final Sign Off

  11. Translation and Adaptation Tools • Item Management Portal to handle the workflow, uploading of xliff and preview of different translation versions • Open Language Tool to translate xliff locally and offline • Tag editors to translate scoring information and to adapt the layout (done centrally)

  12. Web-based Translation Portal

  13. Open Language Tool

  14. Overview • Background Information: The PIAAC Study • Test creation and Translation Process • Overview of process • Translation and Adaptation Tools • User experience: Challenges and lessons learnt

  15. User experience • For the PIAAC project: • Most problems were related to the translation and adaptation tools, not to the xliff standard • The challenge remains that tools were • Either costly • Or insufficiently tested • Or not adapted for a wide audience • Or did not make the most of what the standard offers

  16. Carrying information • Management of errata and successive source versions is a tough nut to crack • Maintenance of TMs posed a variety of unexpected challenges • Segment status was used to “track changes” -> are there better ways to use xliff as a vehicle for this information?

  17. Handling of tags

  18. Handling of tags • In tests with scoring blocks, the proportion of tags versus text was terrifying • inline formatting that involves tag edition seemed difficult to handle for translators and led to corrupt xliff • corrupt XLIFF files sometimes detected late in the process, so that a complex set of motions had to be repeated

  19. Handling oflayout Strict separation of layout and text content • implies a lot of work on pre-press but is a • better alternative than translation in MS Word, where translators introduce layout problems • Safe export of xliff from MS Word or InDesign + seamlessly re-import the translation? • Investigate extracting from e.g. an ENG document and re-importing as RTL language

  20. Dynamic Text • Definition of Dynamic Text Rules e.g. to generate two identical text segments in the XLIFF each time gender-specific entries need to replace gender-neutral entries

  21. Some lessons learnt, next steps For a new study….. • Use of alt-trans to store translation and adaptation history • Customized User guides developed on a need-to-know basis (for different roles) • Extension of notes • Tool support • Read-only notes

  22. Thank you! Questions?

More Related