Re: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments

[Philip Goatly <philip.goatly@bolero.net>]

Hi there,

  Translation tools are OK but with company legal documents - where there
are severe legal implication - I think not

Cheers, Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: <John.Motley@log-net.com>
To: <Steve.GIS.Tompkins@chase.com>
Cc: "Sugamata" <hsedi@attglobal.net>; "Philip Goatly"
<philip.goatly@bolero.net>; <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>;
<ebxml-core@lists.ebxml.org>; <ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org>;
<mizoguchi@ecom.or.jp>; <y-saito@ecom.or.jp>; <waka@ecom.or.jp>;
<swlim@kiec.or.kr>; <franklin@if.com.tw>
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments


>
>
>
> Steve,
>
> We have in international trade application that we have translated in to
> several languages.  We do the transalations in a two step process, first a
> straight translation using one of several translation tools available on
> the net, then a lexical translation where a person with domain expertise
in
> the target language affirms the translation.  We usually find sveral dozen
> phrases per language that are not appropriately translated via automated
> tools.  Some example: our "Submit" button came out fairly offensive in
> Korean and the word "Vendor" came out more like a word that stood for "the
> sales person that helps in the store."  We were following the BSR because
> it seems to be getting support for direct and lexical translation.
>
> Regards,
> John Motley
>
> LOG-NET, Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Steve.GIS.Tompkins@chase.com on 01/26/2001 04:13:38 AM
>
> To:   Sugamata <hsedi@attglobal.net>
> cc:   Philip Goatly <philip.goatly@bolero.net>, mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com,
>       ebxml-core@lists.ebxml.org, ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org,
>       mizoguchi@ecom.or.jp, y-saito@ecom.or.jp, waka@ecom.or.jp,
>       swlim@kiec.or.kr, franklin@if.com.tw
>
> Subject:  Re: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments
>
>
>
> I have a question with regards all this ongoing language business. It
seems
> that we can expect cross language support of some kind or another. Has
> anyone thought of how this is going to be done for languages that use
> different character sets. Using the Japanese example below, if XML is
> presented in Japanese with a very complex character set the translation
> into any western language using the standard Roman character set could be
> quite a hassle. This is also true for Chinese, Thai and Hindi, as well as
> those I can't think of right now. I am not trying to be funny here, if
> anyone has any ideas in this regard I would be very interested to hear
> them.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> Sugamata <hsedi@attglobal.net> on 25/01/2001 15:47:39
>
>
>
> To:   Philip Goatly <philip.goatly@bolero.net>, mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com
> cc:   ebxml-core@lists.ebxml.org, ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org,
>       mizoguchi@ecom.or.jp, y-saito@ecom.or.jp, waka@ecom.or.jp,
>       swlim@kiec.or.kr, franklin@if.com.tw
> Subject:  Re: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments
>
>
> Hi Philip and Martin,
> I can draw the class diagram in Japanese using Rational Rose.
> My concern is how to convert the class diagram in Japanese to XML DTD in
> English.
> More precisely, in the phase of BOM, BRV, BTV, several business experts
are
> involved, and they would like to express their view in those models using
> Japanese language. After the phase of BTV, I wonder BSV can be described
in
> Japanese. For the IT expert in Japan can design BSV in Japanese more
easily
> than in English.
> My question is WHEN the class diagram in Japanese can be mapped in English
> version of the class diagram or XML DTD, and HOW.
>
> At 11:02 01/01/25 +0000, Philip Goatly wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >       Can you not 'extend' the UML model and add a special UML tag. This
> is
> >very easy to do with Rational Rose and put
> >the necessary Japanese in the UML tag ??
> >
> >I could ask some of my Japanese Colleagues here.
> >
> >Italked to a colleague here ans he tells me that would depend on whether
> >rational rose can handle Japanese Unicode characters.
> >
> >Try www.rational.com
> >
> >
> >Cheers Phil Goatly
> >
> >www.bolero.net
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Sugamata" <hsedi@attglobal.net>
> >To: "Blantz, Mary Kay" <mblantz@netfish.com>;
> ><Steve.GIS.Tompkins@chase.com>; "Philip Goatly"
<philip.goatly@bolero.net>
> >Cc: "ebXML Core" <ebxml-core@lists.ebxml.org>; <mizoguchi@ecom.or.jp>;
> ><y-saito@ecom.or.jp>; <waka@ecom.or.jp>; <swlim@kiec.or.kr>;
> ><franklin@if.com.tw>
> >Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 3:55 AM
> >Subject: RE: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments
> >
> >
> > > Hi Mary,
> > > We have been discussing on the language matters in Japan, and we don't
> >care
> > > the English is used as the TAG for XML.
> > > The real problem for us in the non-English world is the language used
> in
> > > the model. We can draw the business process model in our language
> > > (Japanese), but it cannot be mapped in XML world automatically if the
> TAGs
> > > are defined in English.
> > >
> > > Are there any ideas to solve the problem ?
> > >
> > >
> > > At 04:28 01/01/24 -0800, Blantz, Mary Kay wrote:
> > > >I haven't wanted to enter this discussion, Steve, but do want to let
> you
> > > >know that the plan is to start with Oxford English.  People who
> > > >require tags in other languages intend to develop Core Components
(and
> > > >tags) in those languages.  We expect French, German, Russian, and
> >Japanese
> > > >at the very least.  We may even have some people who want to use
> >American!
> > > >
> > > >Mary Kay
> > > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------
> > > Hisanao Sugamata
> > >       ECOM: Electronic Commerce Promotion Council
> > >       TEL: +81-5500-3668
> > >       FAX: +81-5500-3660
> > > -------------------------------------------
> > >
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Hisanao Sugamata
>       ECOM: Electronic Commerce Promotion Council
>       TEL: +81-5500-3668
>       FAX: +81-5500-3660
> -------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>