Skip to main content
KSA
AR·EN·FR
Translation knowledge for real projects

Resource Center

Good translation begins before the first sentence is translated. This resource center is for people who need to prepare a document, brief an interpreter, compare suppliers, localize a product, or decide how much review a project really requires. The guidance is written around decisions that affect accuracy, cost, turnaround and acceptance—not around marketing terminology.

Professional standard

Use these resources to make a better buying decision

A strong resource center should help a client prepare work, evaluate providers and avoid preventable errors. It should not merely repeat service-page marketing.

01

Translation RFQ checklist

Specify content types, source condition, languages and locales, volumes, deadlines, intended use, review expectations, file formats, security requirements and commercial references.

02

AI localization scorecard

Ask where AI is used, which models or environments are approved, whether client data is retained, how human review is assigned, and how output quality is evaluated.

03

Certified-document preparation

Provide complete scans, all pages and marginal notes, and tell us the receiving authority and country. Names, dates, stamps and handwritten additions often determine acceptance.

04

Terminology starter kit

Send existing glossaries, product names, abbreviations, reference translations and terms that must not be translated. A short approved list can prevent extensive rework.

05

Software localization brief

Include screenshots or context, character constraints, variables/placeholders, release cadence, supported locales and the mechanism for returning translated strings.

06

Interpreting brief

Share agenda, speaker names, presentations, terminology, participant profile, venue or platform details, recording policy and any sensitive subjects before the event.

Procurement playbook

Provider evaluation: 12 questions worth asking

The most useful procurement questions test the provider’s operating reality. They should make it harder to hide behind generic claims.

Who is accountable for the project? How are linguists selected? What changes when the content is legally or medically sensitive? How is terminology approved? Can AI processing be disabled? Where are files stored? How are reviewers given context? How are corrections fed back into future work? What evidence supports the provider’s experience claims? How are urgent requests handled? What will the client be able to see during production? What happens to files after delivery?

A provider does not need the same answer as every large global platform. It does need a clear, defensible answer that matches its real technology, people and production environment.

Get an Instant Quote