How to measure translation quality in your user interfaces

Posted by Javier Bargas-Avila, User Experience Research at Google

Worldwide, there are about 200 languages that are spoken by at least 3 million people. In this global context, software developers are required to translate their user interfaces into many languages. While graphical user interfaces have evolved substantially when compared to text-based user interfaces, they still rely heavily on textual information. The perceived language quality of translated user interfaces (UIs) can have a significant impact on the overall quality and usability of a product. But how can software developers and product managers learn more about the quality of a translation when they don’t speak the language themselves?

Key information in interaction elements and content are mostly conveyed through text. This aspect can be illustrated by removing text elements from a UI, as shown in the the figure below.

Three versions of the YouTube UI: (a) the original, (b) YouTube without text elements, and (c) YouTube without graphic elements. It gets apparent how the textless version is stripped of the most useful information: it is almost impossible to choose a video to watch and navigating the site is impossible.

In "Measuring user rated language quality: Development and validation of the user interface Language Quality Survey (LQS)", recently published in the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, we describe the development and validation of a survey that enables users to provide feedback about the language quality of the user interface.

UIs are generally developed in one source language and translated afterwards string by string. The process of translation is prone to errors and might introduce problems that are not present in the source. These problems are most often due to difficulties in the translation process. For example, the word “auto” can be translated to French as automatique (automatic) or automobile (car), which obviously has a different meaning. Translators might chose the wrong term if context is missing during the process. Another problem arises from words that behave as a verb when placed in a button or as a noun if part of a label. For example, “access” can stand for “you have access” (as a label) or “you can request access” (as a button).

Further pitfalls are gender, prepositions without context or other characteristics of the source text that might influence translation. These problems sometimes even get aggravated by the fact that translations are made by different linguists at different points in time. Such mistranslations might not only negatively affect trustworthiness and brand perception, but also the acceptance of the product and its perceived usefulness.

This work was motivated by the fact that in 2012, the YouTube internationalization team had anecdotal evidence which suggested that some language versions of YouTube might benefit from improvement efforts. While expert evaluations led to significant improvements of text quality, these evaluations were expensive and time-consuming. Therefore, it was decided to develop a survey that enables users to provide feedback about the language quality of the user interface to allow a scalable way of gathering quantitative data about language quality.

The Language Quality Survey (LQS) contains 10 questions about language quality. The first five questions form the factor “Readability”, which describes how natural and smooth to read the used text is. For instance, one question targets ease of understanding (“How easy or difficult to understand is the text used in the [product name] interface?”). Questions 6 to 9 summarize the frequency of (in)consistencies in the text, called “Linguistic Correctness”. The full survey can be found in the publication.

Case study: applying the LQS in the field

As the LQS was developed to discover problematic translations of the YouTube interface and allow focused quality improvement efforts, it was made available in over 60 languages and data were gathered for all these versions of the YouTube interface. To understand the quality of each UI version, we compared the results for the translated versions to the source language (here: US-English). We inspected first the global item, in combination with Linguistic Correctness and Readability. Second, we inspected each item separately, to understand which notion of Linguistic Correctness or Readability showed worse (or better) values. Here are some results:

• The data revealed that about one third of the languages showed subpar language quality levels, when compared to the source language.
• To understand the source of these problems and fix them, we analyzed the qualitative feedback users had provided (every time someone selected the lower two end scale points, pointing at a problem in the language, a text box was surfaced, asking them to provide examples or links to illustrate the issues).
• The analysis of these comments provided linguists with valuable feedback of various kinds. For instance, users pointed to confusing terminology, untranslated words that were missed during translation, typographical or grammatical problems, words that were translated but are commonly used in English, or screenshots in help pages that were in English but needed to be localized. Some users also pointed to readability aspects such as sections with old fashioned or too formal tone as well as too informal translations, complex technical or legal wordings, unnatural translations or rather lengthy sections of text. In some languages users also pointed to text that was too small or criticized the readability of the font that was used.
• In parallel, in-depth expert reviews (so-called “language find-its”) were organized. In these sessions, a group of experts for each language met and screened all of YouTube to discover aspects of the language that could be improved and decided on concrete actions to fix them. By using the LQS data to select target languages, it was possible to reduce the number of language find-its to about one third of the original estimation (if all languages had been screened).

LQS has since been successfully adapted and used for various Google products such as Docs, Analytics, or AdWords. We have found the LQS to be a reliable, valid and useful tool to approach language quality evaluation and improvement. The LQS can be regarded as a small piece in the puzzle of understanding and improving localization quality. Google is making this survey broadly available, so that everyone can start improving their products for everyone around the world.

Read More..

All About User Defined Functions in PHP

So far we’ve been using PHPs built-in functions to do our tasks; we also
declared and used user-defined function in the post Creating
a Simple Visitor Counter in PHP. However, we didn’t discuss much
about them. For those of you who are curious to know more about user-defined
functions or those who’d doubts, I’ve written this post. Read along
to know more about user-defined functions.

Declaring functions

In PHP functions are declared using the keyword ‘function’ as below:

function func-name(arg-list)


{

    …

}

Here ‘arg-list’ may be empty if you don’t want the function
to take any arguments.

If you remember from the post Creating
a Simple Visitor Counter in PHP, we’d stated that no matter whether
the function returns a value or not, no return type has to be specified for
the function (unlike C/C++).

a. Functions having parameters

function myfunc($a)


{

    echo $a;


}

b. Functions returning values

function myfunc($a)


{

    return 2*$a;


}

Scope of variables inside and outside of function

1. 
   

   Variables declared inside a function are called local variables and re
   only accessible within the function.

   
   


2. 
   

   Variables declared outside functions are called global variables STILL
   they are NOT directly accessible from inside functions.

   
   

Have a look at the following code:



function myfunc()


{

    $a=10;


}

echo $a;


//$a will not be accessible




//for global varaible

$a=10


function myfunc2()


{

    //again $a not accessible


    echo $a;


}

There is nothing we can do to make local variables accessible outside the
function however global variables can be made accessible inside functions by
explicitly defining that particular function as ‘global’ inside
the function.

$a=10


function myfunc2()


{

    global $a;


    //now $a=10 is accessible


    echo $a;


}

Naming functions

1. 
   

   Two functions cannot have the same name neither your functions can have
   the same name as an existing function. PHP DOES NOT SUPPORT FUNCTION OVERLOADING.

   
   


2. 
   

   Function name may have letters, digits and underscores.

   
   


3. 
   

   Function name cannot begin with a digit.

   
   


4. 
   

   Functions can be of the same name as a variable though.

   
   

Previous Articles:

• 
  

  Sorting
  Arrays in PHP…Some Sorting Functions

  
  


• 
  

  Creating
  a Simple Visitor Counter in PHP

  
  


• 
  

  
  String Manipulation Functions in PHP II

  
  


• 
  

  Creating
  a ‘Contact Us’ Form (E-Mail Version)

  
  


• 
  

  Creating
  a Simple ‘Contact Us’ Form in PHP

  
  

Read More..

Dell Precision M2400 User Review

BY: David, NotebookReview.com Contributor

The Dell Precision M2400 is the Latitude E6400’s identical twin sibling. Built from the same chassis, the only differences between the two lie in the NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M graphics card and the metallic wave design screen cover. While the M2400 is marketed as a mobile workstation and geared towards video editing, animation and CAD manipulation users on the go, the reinforced magnesium alloy chassis and an equally impressive security system makes this particular laptop a great companion not only for road warriors, but for anyone seeking a robust and reliable machine.


Specifications:

• Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo processor T9600 2.8GHz 6MB L2 cache, 1066 FSB
• Graphics: NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M 256MB
• Operating system: Windows Ultimate 64-bit
• Memory: 4GB DDR2 800MHz 6-6-6 (2GB+2GB) [Tested with 2x2GB 800MHz 5-5-5 memory; Max RAM supported-8GB]
• Display: 14.1" WXGA+ LED Back-lit Display (1440x900) Matte
• Hard drive: 120GB 5400rpm SATA 2.5" [Tested with 500GB 5400rpm hard drive]
• Optical drive: 8X DVD/RW Double layer Super Multi Drive
• Ports: 3x USB 2.0 (one with powershare), eSATA/USB combo port, Express card, 5 in1 media card reader, VGA, display port, microphone-in, headphone-out, Ethernet, IEEE 1394
• Wireless: Intel 5300 Link 802.11a/g/n
• Battery: 9-Cell 85 Ah
• Other features: Bluetooth 370, fingerprint reader, webcam, back-lit keyboard, smart card reader and contactless smart card reader
• Warranty: 3-year basic limited warranty and 3 Year NBD on-site service.
• Dimensions: 13.18” x 9.33” x 1.26”
• Price: USD$ 1,007.14 (Refurbished, tax + shipping included)

Build and Design

As I briefly mentioned in the introduction, the M2400 is constructed with a magnesium alloy chassis which helps minimize overall flex and heightens durability. Similar to the Latitude E6400 series, the hinges are extremely robust which gives a strong notion of a brawny build quality. With a durable matte plastic exterior, the M2400 isn’t prone to fingerprints like many of the glossy consumer-class notebooks, yet stands out from most business-class units with a fashionable metallic screen cover.

The selection of ports is excellent and certainly sufficient for most mobile users. There are also docking options available, the E-port replicator ($129) and E-port Plus replicator ($199), for those whom require additional USB ports and/or dual monitor support.

Front: Screen latch, 5 in 1 media card reader

Left: Kensington lock, VGA, USB powershare, eSATA/USB combo port, smart card reader

Right: 2x USB, wireless toggle switch, wifi catcher network locator, microphone in, audio out, optical drive, express card slot, IEEE 1394 firewire

Back: Ethernet, display port, A/C in

One of my main concerns regarding the build is the lack of a hard drive caddy that could effectively provide additional protection to the drive. I am a little disturbed knowing that I am only two screws and a small nudge away from releasing the hard drive from its bay. Even when the hard drive is securely locked in place, there is still a little wiggle room and I would have preferred some physical barrier where my hands can not affect the position of the hard drive during normal operational use.

Screen

Equipped with the LG-Philips LPL0140 (aka LP141WP2) LED screen, the panel offers admirable luminance, average contrast ratios and typical viewing angles.

Despite listing an above average contrast ratio of 500:1 on the spec sheet, the screen appears to be slightly washed out, especially when the brightness is set at maximum. Vertical viewing angles are average while horizontal viewing angles perform slightly better. Graininess is non-existent and all text and images can be produced with high clarity. Although the screen isn’t quite perfect, it’s adequate for most mobile CAD users.

In terms of build, the screen suffers from no wobble and trivial flex. Applying pressure from the back does not cause any color distortions either. Like the Lenovo T series laptops, the M2400 is sturdy enough to be confidently picked up by the screen. Compared to the Latitude E6400, the screen on the M2400 feels more robust. On the other hand, the screen bezel feels frightening delicate and can be pried from all four sides with little effort. This however, doesn’t seem to jeopardize the overall build quality of the screen since most people will rarely run their fingers or sharp objects across their screens.

The ambient light sensor works flawlessly and unlike some of the Asus units I’ve used in the past, the sensor dims and brightens the screen perfectly for my taste. There’s also the option of disabling the light sensor for those who are not accustomed to the automatic light adjustment.

While this particular unit uses an LG-Philips panel, Dell also uses a Samsung screen for the M2400. The Samsung panel (SEC5442) is a tad more washed out, but still provides excellent luminance and similar viewing angles. The differences between these two panels are minute and are only noticeable upon close inspection.

Left-Dell Latitude E6400 with SEC5442; Right-Dell Precision M2400 with LPL0140

Speakers

Using the same integrated IDT high definition stereo speakers as the Latitude E6400, acoustics are average for volume and sub-par for quality. As expected from a 2 channel built-in speaker system, the speakers lack bass, and the treble-heavy audio can easily disgust any audiophile. As John Ratsey mentioned in his Latitude E6400 review, the large speaker grills are primarily decorative and the speakers itself are small ~12mm circular units that sit near the middle of each grill. If anyone should require better quality sound, a pair of headphones or external speakers would help overcome these limitations and suffice most people.

Keyboard and Touchpad

Being a night owl myself, the one feature I fancy most is the back-lit keyboard. It is shameful that many notebook manufactures still don’t offer this wonderful option. Needless to say, my overall typing experience is very pleasing. However, putting the fancy lights aside, the M2400 offers a full-sized keyboard with decent tactile feedback and good comfort. Flex is concentrated mainly on the upper right corner, but is not noticeable with normal daily usage since that particular section is used mostly by your pinky and uses less pressure than other fingers. It would be nice to see more dedicated hotkeys for media controls, but these features are often lacking in business-class laptops.

The touchpad is remarkably small (even the touchpad on the 12.1” Asus U6 has a larger surface area) and difficult to use. Tracking with the touchpad will often require multiple finger movements and can get annoying at times. Luckily, the M2400 offers a track-stick (similar to Lenovo’s trackpoint pointing device) centered between the G, H and B keys which allows easier and more versatile cursor movements. The touchpad buttons can only be described as soft and mushy and has slower tactile feedback than other laptops I have used in the past; it took me a little while to get used to.

Processor and Performance

Configured with the 2.80GHz T9600 Intel processor, NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M graphics chip and 4GB of memory, the M2400 can rip through programs with ease and provide enough multitasking power for most folks. Graphics intensive tasks may suffer somewhat from the GDDR2 graphics memory and a 64-bit bus width, but still be able to handle casual gaming and light CAD applications without issues. Below are benchmarks and CPU/GPU specifications to illustrate a more quantitative analysis of the M2400’s performance.

CPU-Z:

EVEREST, GPU Description:


Windows Experience Index:



3DMark06 comparison results:


PCMark05 Comparison results:


wPrime Comparison results:


HDTune:

Battery Life

The 85WHr 9 cell battery is able to provide enough power for 310 minutes of basic web browsing, instant messaging and word processing with the back-lit keyboard on and screen brightness set at minimum. Although this is less than what Dell has advertized, the figure is still fairly modest for a laptop with this particular hardware configuration. With the 84WHr extended battery slice, I suspect the battery life would double to ~600 minutes under the same conditions.

Heat and Noise

The cooling system on the M2400 is questionable. While the CPU can maintain its own temperatures effectively, the GPU is open to discussion. Unlike the CPU, the GPU and motherboard chipset uses a thermal pad instead of a copper plate for transferring heat to the heat pipe. Since thermal pads doesn’t conduct heat as efficient as copper metal, the Quadro FX 370M can spike up to 95°C during load while running graphics intensive software such as 3DMark06. On the contrary, idle temps run shockingly cool. CPU and GPU temps hold steady at 31°C and 48°C respectively. Operating with an E-dock Plus with an external monitor will increase idle temps by ~10-15°C for both the CPU and GPU.

Thermal pad contact:


Idle temperatures (on battery and without dock):



Idle temperatures (on A/C and with E-Dock Plus):


External temperatures are excellent and the M2400 can be used comfortably on the lap. Basic word processing and web surfing are well below the triple-digit temperatures.

Temperatures measured in Fahrenheit:

The noise from the fan is audible and can get a little irritating at times; especially when the M2400 is parked on the docking station running nothing but the necessary tasks for operating Vista and antivirus software in the background. During normal use without a dock, the fan isn’t as noticeable and runs at lower speeds.

Security Features

Being a business-class laptop, the M2400 is designed with several security features tailored to fit the needs for most businesses. If entering a password is not your preferred mode for logging into your system, the M2400 also offers fingerprint, smart card reader and a contactless smart card reader for your choosing. Every security feature can be accessed and configured in Dell’s ControlPoint Security Manager (already pre-installed and also available on the driver disk). Of course, the industry security standard, TPM (Trusted Platform Module) is also part of the package.

Pictorial Comparison Between the Precision M2400 and Latitude E6400

Left: M2400
Right: E6400

Top: E6400
Bottom: M2400


Customer Service and Support

Within the past month, I have purchased 2 Dell laptops from the Dell outlet store. Although for each purchase there came minor issues, Dell was able to express ship a battery replacement and a missing restore disk that I received the very next day. I was reminded by the rep that the NBD (Next Business Day) warranty service was not part of my protection plan for my Latitude, yet I was still given the “NBD” treatment. Rumors say Dell’s marketing strategy is to under-promise and over-deliver; I won’t argue with that. Dell has also taken a step further to ensure customer satisfaction in which a rep will actively call to follow up on the delivery status and answer any questions or issues you may have with your laptop. I am very impressed with the quality of Dell’s after-sales service and the only negative words I can say is the 15-20 min wait to get an actual human customer rep behind the other line and the inability to view your tracking number and status online.

Conclusion

The Precision M2400 is an excellent match for business professionals and light CAD users. It is a distinguished laptop that offers brilliant processing power with a hint of style. The ruggedness and strapping build is expected from a business laptop, and the M2400 surely lives up to that standard. Although there are some minor setbacks, the M2400 is still a well-made system and can easily survive the daily bumps and bruises encountered by most frequent travelers.

Pros:

• Excellent build quality
• Impressive input/output port selection
• Provides terrific power and performance
• Wide variety of security features
• Cool exterior (in terms of both aesthetics and temperature)
• Exceptional customer service
• Great security features

Cons:

• GPU runs hot and fan operate loudly during load or when attached to the E-Dock Plus
• No switchable graphics option to provide better battery performance
• Cheap plastic screen bezel
• Poor built-in speakers
• Hard drive does not feel secure enough

www.notebookreview.com

Read More..