Yes, please take these 3 files.
As to section 9 and 14 I was not updating hours because there was a chance you may update the files. Can you send me the final hours for files from sections 14 and 9?
I want to be sure we are on the same page regarding capitalization. You want me to stop manually uncapitalize, right?
Please let me know and I will send you the final hour count.
One more question: there are 3 more files I assigned to Emle (12l,n,o), but she will not be able to finish them until Wednesday. If you would take also these files, do you think you could deliver them before Wednesday?
” , file 163 has segment 102, 104, and 106 as untranslated, yet it’s in German. Can you double-check and tell me what’s going on? Is it a simple oversight and I should just mark it translated and be done or do you need to correct the translation?
“So I translated all the new files before continuing with the process you described above, because I was not sure about how to proceed, and Transit’s Help part isn’t very helpful either.
I attached another little file with some (very) minor but probably sensible glossary suggestions.
I started working on 10f, and it looks like it is going to need a lot of work. I know that 18m will be very long to take care of: it is a spell file and there were plenty of tag issues in the first place. I don’t think I can do all six by Wednesday.
I can guess that 12l will be very long to fix, because I proofread some of ‘s files.
Let me know which ones you want first and I will take care of them.
About capitalization – yes, please stop uncapitalizing unless you change the word for other reasons. I pray the capitalization macro will work.
Formula doesn’t work 🙁 I guess I’ll try to ask .
Please do these three files – 10f, 10k and 18m first. I will let Emle struggle with and tell her to make sure she does it well.
Sorry for this. I changed that to the source text in order to get the symbols within the sentence back and I forgot to mark it as translated again afterwards.
You can just mark them as translated – theyÂ´re ok.
Awww, no, not the client again.
Anyway, please have 05 reps ready as soon as possible.
To summarize, are the proofreading hours for these files are the following:
It comes out 10.75 for some reason.
Here is the hour count for sections 14, 9 and 17.
I posted sections 9 and 17.
The filenames are:
JD – French – Section 9 –
– Proofread – New.zip
JD – French – Section 17 –
I got the files. Proofreading of ‘ file is… impressive. Also Karen.
Which reminds me. We will complete proofreading of unproofread files soon, but there may be very bad files, proofread by someone other then you or Alexandre, which did not get much better even after they were proofread. I would appreciate if you helped identify such files.
Karel wants everything translated in 3 weeks now instead of 4.
Please prioritise 05_reps now. Ignore the new glossary work. It will be just as disruptive even if it’s delayed a bit.
Okay. I think Emle and Carine are doing a good job – I will check some of their files later.
I think we should focus on files proofed by .
File 2d and section 4 should be proofread. The proofer MUST be able to use the macro, it will save a lot of time and ensure consistency. These files should not take too long to proof.
Then, there are files proofed by Sylvia and Tefack, that is 15j through 15o and 18l (18l is a spell file with tags everywhere).
If we still have time after that, I will check some of the other proofer’s files to decide which to proof again.
Let me know what you think.
I think we are thinking in the same direction.
I still can’t use the macro. Hope Catherine and Carine will be able to install it.
I’m glad to see we agree.
Carine contacted me regarding the formula, she had problems with it. I don’t know about Catherine. Does she have files assigned? If not – and if she can use the macro – she might be a good pick to check the item files. ANd if she has question regarding the macro, I can try to answer.
By the way, which version of Excel are you using and what is the language? Your problem might come from formula vs Excel version.
Catherine actually works on the item lists. She had not been available on weekend, and will be back tomorrow. I would like to figure out how to use the macro before she returns.
I have English version of Excel 2003.
If you did not already, enter this in the file you want to check – to the right of the text for example:
“GLOSSARY.xls” is the name of your reference Excel document, for example ” _Glossary”, modify accordingly
“NoDups” is the sheet you want to use in this Excel document, modify accordingly
“A1” and “B1″ are the first cells with text, modify accordingly
That worked for me. I use Excel 2002, but I believe 2003 is very similar.
If it still doesn’t work, you might want to ask . He solved my problem within minutes.
I hope this helps.
Please find the file attached.
I have just checked the file, there is no problem you can go ahead with the vetting.
The explanation is simple: some sentences have been split in several bits, thus, where I could find the different bits I adapted the translation so it would be coherent when it is glued back together by the system.
Also, you can use the 16a file I uploaded today, I did a few minor fixes (not related to the non-issue mentioned above though)
Thank you for getting back to me. I also prefer OT for communication.
The sheet where I have the glossary is NoDups. I am trying to insert in file I’m working on, French_JD_100201_Localize_1a_backup.xls, the formula in column C, writing:
And it still gives me an error message.
How can it be repaired?
File 15f and report uploaded. I changed the name of the file too. 2 hours.
My report is quite short as the style is better and there are fewer mistranslations than in the translator’s previous file. But the mistakes are still of the same nature. So my comments about grammar/conjugation and spelling are pretty much the same.
but you don’t want me to look closely for consistency with the newest glossary, right?
In case you already updated the pretranslated parts, would it make sense that I proofread an updated version of the files now, and if so, could you send me these files?
” maybe it would be easiest if you send me the two files (of course, just the first few lines of each) so I can check that. If that’s not possible it would be good to know the exact error message you get, like #VALUE, #N/A, FALSE and so on. “Alexandre
Thank you for checking.
16a – I see you uploaded a rar file with few new and 4 updated files. Do you want us to use these ones?
As I said, I deducted 0,5h which I did not spend proofreading but spent emailing, uploading and writing glossary comments.
So 10,25h is the total time I spent proofreading 6a-d.
ok. These are my hours in detail:
There’s no update to the pretranslated parts. Pretranslated parts are partially from JD and partially from reps file. The reps file uses 07 June glossary. Updating pre-translated parts will require constant updating of the reps file, which is impractical. The JD parts probably doesn’t need that sort of update and is impossible to update due to the way Transit works.
As to consistency with the glossary, I don’t know. I get conflicting reports from other proofreaders. One says it’s fine. The other says there are two-three old glossary terms per file. Still another is totally silent. But I guess I have to give you some sort of guideline, eh?
Okay, don’t spend too much time on the pretranslation. If this means no thorough check on glossary consistency, so be it.
, please translating the following batch of files.
Same procedure as before.
Please confirm and also estimate when you’ll be done when you do so. Thanks.
you mean proofreading, right? (“, please translating the following batch of files.”). Though thereÂ´re few untranslated.
I can confirm proofing 04_238-39_241-43_DEU_tobe_proofed.PXF.
ItÂ´s all in all around 26K – I hope to get it done tomorrow (maybe late) afternoon.
Gah, you’re right, I mean proofread.
Shows that I’ve been working too much. 🙂