Single English master vs multilingual text insets in FrameMaker — workflow advice?

Question

Hi all,I’m looking for some insight into how others are managing translations in Adobe FrameMaker, particularly when working with multiple languages and text insets.In our current setup, we maintain a large number of language-specific text insets across different manuals. While this works, it introduces quite a bit of complexity when it comes to updating content, relinking insets, and handling DTP after translations are returned. It can also make long-term consistency across languages harder to manage.I guess I'm questioning if this is the correct approach, as opposed to maintaining a single English master version of manuals and insets, and then generating all translations from that source. From a workflow and file management perspective, a single-source approach seems like it could simplify maintenance and reduce manual effort.Has anyone here moved from a multi-language inset setup to an English master workflow? If so, what were the pros and cons, and did it improve efficiency in practice?Im guessing a move in this direction would also assist in a shift towards an xliff workflow, as opposed to MIF files we send to translators now.Thanks in advance for any insights or experiences you can share.

Bob_Niland · Answer

Broadly, there are three approaches, which you’ve likely already considered:

document per language
exposed multi-lingual document
single multi-lingual master, collapsed to single-language for pub

When I was last running an FM shop, we did №1. These came back off random DTP & WP platforms, not infrequently from MS Word. In those days there was no easy way to double-check the work, and the work would of course lack any features of the domestic version, esp. internal hypertext.

№2 is really only suitable for short documents, like Quick Start Guides. To avoid the concerns of №3, the translations would likely be out-sourced and then merge by the core author.

№3 sort of implies that the translators will be working with the same master being maintained by the domestic core author. Change control, FM fluency, and a comprehensive style guide or self-documenting template would be key.

My shop only did №3 for same-language domestic vs. export editions, via Conditional Text & Import Formats. This involved matters like US letter vs. A4 page size, differences in trade terms, no US customary measures in the metric versions, etc. It worked, but would be more more challenging for actual language variants.

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.