| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Can't see an active glossary in omega T Thread poster: howard carter
|
|---|
| not more than 3 columns in an OmegaT glossary #2 | Aug 30, 2010 |
Didier Briel wrote:
OmegaT works indeed as can be expected: the first 3 columns are read, and the rest is ignored.
Didier
That's a good news; the last time, a few years ago, the glossarie with more than 3 columns could not be seen, at least in my system. So I followed the directive about 3 columns max, and haven't ever attempted again with more than three. Directives do make effect on me.
| | | | Susan Welsh 
United States
Local time: 10:43
Russian to English
+ ...
| @Howard - what happened? | Sep 2, 2010 |
Howard, did you succeed? Several people have tried to help you, and I've always thought it incumbent upon the "asker" to indicate whether the information supplied has enabled him/her to solve the problem or not. For one thing, it is helpful to others who might have the same problem, including those searching the archives in the future.
Susan
| | | | | "progress" report - glossary creation | Sep 2, 2010 |
Hi Susan, thanks again for the help. I should confess right off, that I´m not really sure if this is the right way to reply, that is, through the comments window. I did send a mail back thanking everyone for their help, but perhaps it needs to go through this route and not via the more direct email channel. To the point: I reinstalled a more up-to-the-minute version of omega T, 2.1 something, and this seemed to do the trick. The terms became immeditately visible and, although I struggled to in... See more Hi Susan, thanks again for the help. I should confess right off, that I´m not really sure if this is the right way to reply, that is, through the comments window. I did send a mail back thanking everyone for their help, but perhaps it needs to go through this route and not via the more direct email channel. To the point: I reinstalled a more up-to-the-minute version of omega T, 2.1 something, and this seemed to do the trick. The terms became immeditately visible and, although I struggled to insert them efficiently, the glossary had obviously become an integral part of the project. Howver, on starting a second project, it seemed to be a quesition of back to square 1. I went through all the same proceedures again and found myself incapable of creating a working glossary. Might it be a problem with windows vista with which I am working?? Thanks again, for your very kind help ▲ Collapse
| | | | Didier Briel
France
Local time: 16:43
English to French
+ ...
| Replicate what works | Sep 2, 2010 |
howard carter wrote:
I reinstalled a more up-to-the-minute version of omega T, 2.1 something, and this seemed to do the trick. The terms became immeditately visible
That would be a good indication that the final extension was indeed .txt, as has been suggested above. OmegaT 2.0.x did not recognize glossaries with this extension.
Howver, on starting a second project, it seemed to be a quesition of back to square 1. I went through all the same proceedures again and found myself incapable of creating a working glossary.
Starts with something that works. I.e., copy the working glossary (from Project 1) into the glossary folder of Project 2, and then edit it.
Might it be a problem with windows vista with which I am working??
There's no specific issue with Vista.
Didier
| | |
|
|
|
Susan Welsh
United States
Local time: 10:43
Russian to English
+ ...
howard carter wrote:
I did send a mail back thanking everyone for their help....
I didn't get it for some reason, but no problem. I thought you had disappeared.
On the more substantive matters, go with Didier!
good luck
| | | |
I finally took Didier's advice and simply copied the working glossary and modified it. This works fine. The mechanics seem to be mind-bogglingly abstruse for such a simple thing. Or is it just me? Thanks to all, take care, H.
| | | | Didier Briel
France
Local time: 16:43
English to French
+ ...
| It's usually Windows | Sep 7, 2010 |
howard carter wrote:
I finally took Didier's advice and simply copied the working glossary and modified it. This works fine. The mechanics seem to be mind-bogglingly abstruse for such a simple thing. Or is it just me?
The most usual issue is that Windows rely on extensions (e.g., .txt) to identify documents, and at the same time hide them to its users.
If it is the case on your computer, I recommend showing these extensions, this makes things a little less mysterious.
See a tutorial to show extensions
Didier
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 16:43
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Somewhat OT: Extensions crucial to Windows? | Sep 7, 2010 |
esperantisto wrote:
There is a really schizophrenic thing about Windows: on the one hand, a file name extension is crucial for Windows (Unix-like system do not have a concept of extension at all), but on the other hands, the default setting is to hide the extensions for known file types.
I'm not aware that extensions are crucial to Windows. Windows programs do make use of extensions to help indicate which application is the default application for opening the file, but I seldom encounter Windows programs that won't open an extensionless file as long as the file is in the correct format.
OmegaT is the thing here that *requires* the extension. If you take a TMX file and rename it to something.txt and put it in OmegaTs TM location, OmegaT won't read it, even though it is in the correct format. If you regard this as a problem (and I'm not saying it is a problem), then it is a problem with OmegaT, and not with Windows.
OpenOffice.org (OOo) has a similar problem. Drag and drop an XLS file (spreadsheet) to MS Word, and MS Word will attempt to open it itself. Drag and drop an ODS file (spreadsheet) to OOo Writer, and OOo Writer will refuse to open it, and it will open in OOo Calc instead. So OOo can't open files if they don't have the right extension... something that MS Word doesn't have a problem with.
[Edited at 2010-09-07 10:09 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
esperantisto
Local time: 17:43
Member (2006)
English to Russian
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
Samuel Murray wrote:
I'm not aware that extensions are crucial to Windows.
Well, rename somefile.doc to somefile.exe and double-click on it in Explorer…
Drag and drop an XLS file (spreadsheet) to MS Word, and MS Word will attempt to open it itself.
a) this happens only if the XLS import filter for Word is installed;
b) this is quite stupid for a word processor to try opening a spreadsheet.
Drag and drop an ODS file (spreadsheet) to OOo Writer, and OOo Writer will refuse to open it, and it will open in OOo Calc instead.
Of course. Unlike Word/Excel/PowerPoint/Access which were originally developed as separate programs and only later bundled into something called Microsoft Office (do you remember, initially Microsoft Office was merely a toolbar for quick access to Word, Excel and some other apps on the top of Windows 3.x? It hasn’t gone very far since that.), OOo was from the beginning a suite. Thus, Writer/Calc/Impress/Draw/Base are modules of the same, and this has nothing to do with file name extensions.
So OOo can't open files if they don't have the right extension...
Samuel, sorry, but this is nonsense. OOo, unlike any MSO app, will correctly (i.e., loading the correct module, should it be Writer, or Calc, or Impress) open a file even if it has no extension at all (and I use it to open e-mail attachments with garbled file names instead of guessing, if I should use Word or Excel).
something that MS Word doesn't have a problem with.
Again, sorry, but, again, it’s nonsense. Rename somefile.doc to somefile.docx, try to open it in Word and see a nice error message about wrong format.
P.S. I refer here to my experience with OOo 3.2.1 and MSO 2007, but the most of I’ve said is also true for other versions of the two suites.
| | | | Susan Welsh
United States
Local time: 10:43
Russian to English
+ ...
| "mind-bogglingly abstruse" | Sep 7, 2010 |
howard carter wrote:
The mechanics seem to be mind-bogglingly abstruse for such a simple thing.
I suggest that the developer discussion of file extensions be moved to another location, as it has nothing to do with OmegaT per se, and can only confuse people and lead new OmegaT users to the conclusion that this is a direction they for sure do not want to go.
OmegaT's beauty is that it is NOT "mind-bogglingly abstruse," but actually very simple, compared to the competition.
Susan
| | | |
I would certainly concede that omega T is simpler than the competition. However, what would be ideal is the kind of auto-correct/or automatic completion option available in word, but capable of memorizing segments from the entire computer disc. If I have to translate a letter, it is not really worthwhile setting up a project, but I may have written a very similar letter a dozen times before.
As far as the glossary itself is concerned (the topic of this thread), I stand by "abstruse"; odf,... See more I would certainly concede that omega T is simpler than the competition. However, what would be ideal is the kind of auto-correct/or automatic completion option available in word, but capable of memorizing segments from the entire computer disc. If I have to translate a letter, it is not really worthwhile setting up a project, but I may have written a very similar letter a dozen times before.
As far as the glossary itself is concerned (the topic of this thread), I stand by "abstruse"; odf, txt, udf7, special coding filters, invisible file extensions, MS Word schizophrenia, you name it! Abstruse is euphemistic for something more insidious. Can one be a technophile and a technophobe at the same time? H ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 16:43
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| More about nonsense | Sep 8, 2010 |
esperantisto wrote: Samuel Murray wrote:
I'm not aware that extensions are crucial to Windows. Well, rename somefile.doc to somefile.exe and double-click on it in Explorer…
Yes, but this is something else, which is not related to the original discussion. The original poster wasn't trying to open a glossary by using Explorer, but by using OmegaT.
It is true that Explorer uses the file extension to know how to handle the file, but the user can choose to handle the file differently regardless of the file extension. And the developers of a program running on Windows can choose to do what it wants to with a file, regardless of the file's extension.
Hence my statement that file extensions are not crucial to Windows.
Drag and drop an XLS file (spreadsheet) to MS Word, and MS Word will attempt to open it itself. b) this is quite stupid for a word processor to try opening a spreadsheet.
All right, bad example. Try a CSV file. You can edit it in a spreadsheet program or you can edit it in a database program or you can edit it in a text program. It depends on what the user wants to do with the file, or how he wants to edit it.
If you try to open a CSV file in MS Word, MS Word will open it as a plain text file (which is what it is). If you try to open a CSV file in OOo Writer, OOo Writer will launch Calc and will refuse to open it as plain text. The only way to open a CSV file in OOo Writer is to rename the file from something.csv to something.txt first.
So OOo can't open files if they don't have the right extension... Samuel, sorry, but this is nonsense. OOo, unlike any MSO app, will correctly (i.e., loading the correct module, should it be Writer, or Calc, or Impress) open a file even if it has no extension at all...
Perhaps my statement was unclear. I didn't say that OOo won't open a file correctly if it has *no* file extension. I meant that OOo will not open a file in the way that the user wants to open the file if the file has an existing extension which is not the extension that OOo expects the file to have.
...something that MS Word doesn't have a problem with. Again, sorry, but, again, it’s nonsense. Rename somefile.doc to somefile.docx, try to open it in Word and see a nice error message about wrong format.
Using MS Word 2003 on Windows XP Pro SP2:
* I get no error message if I rename something.doc to something.docx and I open it in MS Word (even if I specify in the dropdown list "2007" instead of "All files").
* If I rename something.docx to something.doc, and I try to open it in MS Word, then MS Word tries first to parse it as DOC (because of the file extension, no doubt), and then asks me what kind of a file I want it to assume it is (and if I choose "2007" then it opens the file correctly).
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | There is no moderator assigned specifically to this forum. To report site rules violations or get help, please contact site staff » Can't see an active glossary in omega T | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
