Localization SIG Guidelines

International Game Developers Association

Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to the IGDA Localization SIG's Guidelines and Statutes, as agreed upon by the SIG steering committee. These guidelines were established for the smooth operation of the SIG and the formation of SIG Working Groups and are not meant to be additional bureaucracy. Any questions, comments or suggestions about these guidelines should be directed to the SIG Chair (Kate Edwards, [kate] @ [englobe dot com]).

Back to the Localization SIG Main Page: http://www.igda.org/wiki/Localization_SIG


Contents

What is the GLSIG?

The Games Localization SIG (GLSIG) exists to provide a focal point and nexus for the growing number of game localization professionals in order to build community, draw together best practices and processes, and emphasize the requisite international dimension of game content development towards the goal of improving global game development processes and local end user experiences. The SIG encourages people interested in “globalization” of games to freely exchange ideas and improve the knowledge and tools for creation, transformation and delivery of game contents for a global audience. The GLSIG provides resources in the form of standards creation and maintenance, research reports, and recommended practices. Anyone with a commercial and/or general interest in the globalization (g12n), internationalization (i18n), localization (l10n), culturalization (c13n) or translation of game content is encouraged to become a member of the GLSIG. If not already, we strongly encourage all SIG members to become paid members of the IGDA.

The video game industry has been growing almost non-stop since its humble beginnings back in the 1970s. For many years there were two clear markets and games were designed for them, namely the U.S. and Europe. The end of the 20th C. saw the emergence and strengthening of several other markets around the world, creating new lucrative opportunities for games publishers, as well as new challenges. But the game industry never really had the chance to prepare for this multilingual challenge where cultural differences play an unavoidably essential part. It is the belief of the members of GLSIG, experienced game and localization industry professionals as well as scholars in game localization, that planning, procedures, and tools sensible to localization can facilitate, streamline, and speed up the adaptation of multimedia interactive entertainment software products to other locales. With this goal in mind, the GLSIG is committed to produce a body of knowledge to help all the different parties involved to understand and implement the actions needed for a smooth localization process.

Organization

The GLSIG was born in June 2007 in order to serve the need of the game localization community, when Tom Edwards gained approval from the IGDA for the creation of this much-needed SIG. Tom, acting as the SIG chair, quickly recruited Heather Chandler and Miguel Bernal to act as co-vice-chairs. The SIG was formally announced in an IGDA mailing in September 2007 and the group’s presence on the IGDA wiki pages was established (http://www.igda.org/wiki/Localization_SIG). In addition, a Yahoo group was created as a makeshift distribution list (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/igda-locsig/) as well as a group within Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=5617301247). The foundation of the GLSIG is the Working Groups. Each Working Group is managed by the Working Group Chair(s). The Working Group Chairs are supervised by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee is managed by the GLSIG Chair. The chair and the steering committee are there to interface with the IGDA and facilitate progress in the different initiatives addressed by the Working Groups. All of these groups are responsible to the General Membership (GM), which makes up the GLSIG. The general membership is organized into Working Groups based around prominent issues. Working Groups are created by members who wish to take a leading role in seeing a particular topic discussed and conclusions drawn and published (see below for a full description of the operation of Working Groups.)

Operation

The GLSIG operates as an autonomous group, with its own advisory board, steering committee and working groups. The majority of activity is in discussion of various topics of interest to the members, which is conducted via private Internet mailing lists. As is often the case in groups like this, every participant is free to choose their own level of contribution, though naturally participants are encouraged (and needed) to work on creating issues and solutions, not to just sit back and review everyone else’s work. The process, in general, is geared towards gaining consensus, and the wider SIG membership is given ample opportunity to comment on the progress of each Working Group through reports given at regular physical meetings as well as via e-mail or teleconferencing.

Policies

  • It is NOT appropriate for members to use the GLSIG’s public meetings or email lists as a forum for making disparaging remarks about other individuals, technologies or, member companies, nor to do self promotional or promotional activities in general. This SIG is intended to be a collaborative group between peers sharing common goals, concerns and interests. Members who post personal/commercial promotions and marketing will be warned, but may face removal from the SIG if they don’t refrain.
  • The GLSIG is devoted to cooperation and open discussion. SIG members are expected to use professional discretion when speaking out at our public meetings. Such judicial use of your good judgment will help our organization ensure that cooperation and openness will not be jeopardized.
  • At the same time, however, dissenting voices must be heard and given their due so as to promote open, honest and challenging discussions and to reach the best conclusions. When remarks need to be negative and perhaps contentious, they should be made on the GLSIG main or WG mailing lists or in closed, members only meetings. In this way, these important sentiments can be expressed, discussed, and acted upon, without causing unwanted side effects.
  • Remarks made on the GLSIG main or WG mailing lists or in closed, members only meetings are the property of the GLSIG and cannot be reproduced with out the express written consent of the GLSIG Steering Committee.
  • This statement of ownership is intended to provide a level of comfort to all members that what they say or what is said about them within the confines of the SIG will not be misrepresented or re-broadcast without consent and approval. This helps create an environment of trust and security needed to speak openly and honestly within the SIG community.
  • Our open meetings, on the other hand, are intended for the dissemination of our work and results to the public and the industry at large. To this end, we invite press and influential industry folks to attend and hear what we have to say. This way, what media attention we do receive will focus on the great work and positive accomplishments of the group as a whole and not on small episodes of controversy.
  • The press and public are generally invited to attend any GLSIG endorsed event occurring in conjunction with a trade show, such as General or Working Group meetings and/or special presentations at GDC and Localization World. This does not include closed meetings such as Working Group meetings held at private (usually corporate) sites.

Steering Committee and Guidelines

The Steering Committee is a group comprised of the SIG Chair and Vice-Chairs – being a group of any odd number of members, no less than three. New members of the Steering Committee should be solicited (through nominations or volunteers from the General Membership) when an existing member steps down. Final approval of any new Steering Committee members will be subject to the discretion of the current Steering Committee members. In the event that a clear decision is not evident, the Steering Committee may chose to adopt a formal voting process for this purpose at that time. The main job of the Steering Committee is the administration of the GLSIG which includes the following functions:

  • act as the primary liaison with the IGDA and other SIG leaders.
  • request and manage any IGDA SIG funds, as appropriated for the GLSIG.
  • keep the GLSIG and Working Group mailing lists.
  • schedule and publicize annual and semi-annual meetings.
  • publicize the findings of the Working Groups.
  • review and implement new technologies, such as a WWW home page and/or the SIG’s presence on IGDA web resources (e.g., the IGDA wiki).
  • create and implement strategies for the recruiting of new members.
  • create and implement revenue generating ventures (non recruitment oriented), such as a Job Fair / Classifieds.
  • act as points of contact for and manage ongoing relationships with other organizations wishing to work with the GLSIG.
  • review, suggest revisions to, and approve new Working Group proposals.
  • request submissions of proposals from a member of the GLSIG who identifies a significant issue, but cannot rally enough of a response from the GM to form a Working Group. Upon receipt of such a proposal, the Steering Committee will then decide upon what action it wishes to take. Such action may include publishing the results, requesting more information, putting the proposal out to the GM for feedback, etc.
  • act individually as representatives to the Working Groups. The Steering Committee representative will provide guidance as needed to the Working Group Chair to facilitate results in the Working Group. The Steering Committee representative will also serve as the communications conduit between the Working Group and the Steering Committee. In the event of persistent difficulties it may be necessary for the Steering Committee representative to recommend actions be taken by the Steering Committee to either get the Working Group back on track or disband it entirely.
  • keep track of the progress of the Working Group and resolve issues brought before the committee by Working Group’s Steering Committee representatives.

The GLSIG Chair and Vice-Chair(s)

The GLSIG Chair is primarily responsible for overseeing the processes and functions of the Steering Committee, which is comprised of the Chair and the Vice-Chairs. The Vice-Chairs are responsible for helping the Chair accomplish the goals of the SIG and assist in the management of the SIG. New GLSIG Chairs and Vice-Chairs will be nominated from existing (or new) Steering Committee members when an existing GLSIG Chair/Vice-Chair resigns. The Chair/Vice-Chair assignment is subject to approval by the remaining members.

6.1 Primary responsibilities of the GLSIG Chair:

  • act as the primary liaison with the IGDA and other SIG leaders.
  • request and manage any IGDA SIG funds, as appropriated for the GLSIG.
  • keep track of the overall direction and performance of the GLSIG.
  • schedule, coordinate, and set agendas for Steering Committee meetings (in person or conference calls).
  • manage Steering Committee activities.
  • ensure that the GLSIG and the Steering Committee remain honest and non partisan bodies.
  • delegate tasks (such as setting up meetings) to Steering Committee members (including themselves).

6.2 Primary responsibilities of the GLSIG Vice-Chair(s):

  • assist the Chair in acting as a liaison with the IGDA and other SIG leaders.
  • provide ongoing input on SIG progress, activities and goals
  • assist in requesting and managing any IGDA SIG funds, as appropriated for the GLSIG.
  • keep track of the overall direction and performance of the GLSIG.
  • help oversee Working Group activity
  • help encourage ongoing participation by SIG members

Past & Present Steering Committee Members

The following details the specific members of the GLSIG Steering Committee leadership:

The 2011-2012 2-year term:

  • Kate Edwards (Chair)
  • Miguel Bernal (Vice-Chair)
  • Edwin Steussy (Vice-Chair)
  • Richard Honeywood – Game Industry Representative (Vice-Chair)
  • Fabio Minazzi – Localization Industry Representative (Vice-Chair)

The founding 2007-2010 term:

  • Kate Edwards (Chair)
  • Miguel Bernal (Vice-Chair)
  • Heather Chandler (Vice-Chair)
  • Richard Honeywood – Game Industry Representative (Vice-Chair)
  • Fabio Minazzi – Localization Industry Representative (Vice-Chair)


Working Groups

The GLSIG membership is organized into Working Groups based around prominent issues, such as Localization tools, Marketing implications of localization, etc. Working Groups are proposed by members who wish to take a leading role in seeing a particular topic discussed and conclusions drawn and published. The GLSIG working groups are an excellent opportunity for members to accomplish tasks that might otherwise not be possible from within their own domain of control and a way to spread the responsibilities of the GLSIG among interested and passionate members (not just the Steering Committee). The cooperation of GLSIG members will create a wealth of knowledge valuable for all parts of the industry, which will in turn improve awareness, planning, and standards.

7.1- Suggested Working Groups as of 2 May, 2008:

  • Localization World Roundtable
  • Translation
  • Audio
  • Tools
  • Education/Evangelization

Any member who wishes to start a Working Group must fill out a Working Group Goals document and send it to the Steering Committee for review and approval. This is an opportunity for the Steering Committee to suggest changes and offer advice to the potential Working Group Chair. It is also an opportunity for the Steering Committee to inform the member of the Working Group Chairman’s Responsibilities.

Once any changes requested by the Steering Committee have been implemented, the Working Group Goals document will be distributed to the General Membership. All interested members may then request to join the Working Group.

If there is sufficient member interest in the group, the Steering Committee will approve the charter and assign a member of the Steering Committee as a representative to work with the Working Group Chair and help manage the effort to completion. If response was not sufficient to convene a Working Group, but the Steering Committee feels that the topic is significant, the Steering Committee may consider alternative actions, such as soliciting formal proposals for discussion or investigating other means for determining consensus on the issue. Within the limitations and structures defined herein, each working Group will have its own unique character and style of operation. For a discussion of some common Working Group methods see the appropriately titled section below.

Working Group chairs will approve all requests for Working Group membership, keeping in mind that fewer members is likely to be more efficient, yet not wanting to limit the quality and variety of positive contributions. In any case, no request will be unreasonably denied. Administration of all Working Group email lists is handled by a list administrator who will add each member’s name to the mailing list reflector for that Working Group.

7.2 Working Group Chairs' Responsibilities

Working Group Chairs should be GLSIG members with a particularly relevant skill set and knowledge base regarding the Working Group's topic. The Working Group Chair is the person who will take personal responsibility for seeing progress made and conclusions generated by the Working Group. Therefore, practical, professional, hands on experience of the topic is required. The first task (and test) of a potential Working Group Chair is to complete the Working Group Guidelines document. This document outlines the topic, purpose, goals, and schedules of the Working Group. The Guidelines document then serves as the ongoing road map for the activity of the Working Group. It is the Working Group Chair's responsibility to see this Guidelines document turned into a publishable statement of the Working Group findings.

The Working Group Chair is also responsible for keeping track of the schedule outlined in the original Working Group Guidelines document and informing the Steering Committee representative if that schedule needs to be changed. The Working Group Chair's activity is overseen by the assigned representative on the Steering Committee. The Working Group Chair (or an appointed scribe) must create and continuously edit a document or documents based upon the original Guidelines document that reflects the findings of the Working Group (A Statement Of Findings). In this, the Working Group Chair serves as a filter for all of the information generated by the Working Group. It is the Working Group Chair's responsibility to identify the salient points of an issue, identify the various ideas, camps or proponents, and seek to reach consensus around the most widely acceptable point of view. The procedural details of how this conclusion is to be reached will depend upon the personality and style of the Working Group Chair and the activity level of the membership. When, in the Working Group Chair's opinion, enough information has been filled into a Statement Of Findings document to warrant publishing, the document should then be sent to Working Group with a call for serious objections, and the Working Group Chair should set a period of time for a response. This period should be no less than two weeks long. At the end of the response period, the Working Group Chair should prepare a formal Statement Of Findings.

Note: Under certain extreme circumstances, such as a deadline for inclusion in a related API or industry wide initiative, the time for response may be set for less than two weeks. In such cases, the Working Group Chair MUST seek and receive the approval of the Steering Committee or an override of such by the GLSIG Chairman. If the Working Group has not reached a specific conclusion, or there are insurmountable objections, it is acceptable and encouraged for the Working Group Chair to create a Statement of Findings that reflects this status, listing the various opinions in a fair, even handed way, yet draws no definitive conclusion.

In any case, serious 'objections' and dissenting opinions need minimally to be included as an appendix in any Statement of Findings (with reference to the person and company affiliation of the objector). Such objections need not appear in any press releases (which need to be clean and concise), but should be included in any reference materials or proceedings which are to be published by the GLSIG or MMA.

Working Group Methods

There are a variety of methods for running a successful working group. The following three methods are outlined as reference points: 8.1- The Incremental (or Step by Step) Method. 8.2- The DIY Method. 8.3- The End Run Method. While they are certainly not the only way to generate results, they have proven their worth. Other methods may be considered by the GLSIG Steering Committee.

8.1- The Incremental (or Step by Step) Method

Presuming that the Working Group is a dynamic, active group where members have much to contribute, then it is the Working Group Chair's job to focus this discussion on the issues presented in the Guidelines document. The Working Group Chair (or scribe) should simultaneously fill in data as it surfaces on the questions and issues outlined in the Working Group's Guidelines document. If there is unanimous (or close to unanimous) agreement on an issue, than the Working Group Chair (or scribe) should write this into the working draft of Statement of Findings document. The Working Group Chair should then move the discussion on to the next issue. If there are numerous opinions expressed in the group on an issue, the Working Group Chair should set a period of time in which open debate on the issue proceeds. At the end of that period, the Working Group Chair should draft a proposal that outlines what he or she feels is the most workable solution, submit it to the Working Group with a call for serious objections, and set a period of time for a response. The response period should be no less than two weeks, but no more than one month. As long as there are not overwhelming objections, the content proposal should be written in to the working draft of Statement of Findings document. In the case of overwhelming objections, the Working Group Chair and the Steering Committee representative will decide upon the best course of action. Such action may include sending the proposal back for more debate, including multiple opinions in the Statement of Findings, or relegating some of the opinions to the objections appendix of the Statement. Advantages: This is by far the most desirable method as it is most likely to represent genuine consensus. It is the least likely to be derailed after long debate because strong opposing opinions have been silent during the process. Disadvantages: This is an open ended method where discussion could go on for long periods of time without much forward progress. It also requires a very high level of energy and commitment from a large number of people that is hard to instigate if it does not occur naturally.

8.2- The D.I.Y. Method

If a Working Group is mostly inactive or reactive, but opinionated nonetheless, then the Working Group Chair MUST take it upon themselves to lead the discussion by putting forth specific ideas as to how particular issues should be resolved. The Working Group Chair must then focus the forthcoming discussion on the pros and cons of that particular solution. If it does not meet with general approval, then the Working Group Chair should either put forth a different idea or enlist another member of the group to draft and put forth a proposal. In either case submission to the Working Group and the call for objections would function as in the Incremental method.

The maverick nature of this method will be kept in check by the Steering Committee representative. Since there is no formal requirement for a final vote it is the responsibility of the Steering Committee representative to be aware of the overall spectrum of opinion in the Working Group and make sure that it is reasonable represented in any Statement of Findings document. Advantages: This method is particularly useful when the Working Group is having a hard time presenting solutions or the topic is highly technical, obscure, or new science. It will tend to move things along rather quickly and remain focused. Disadvantages: This method will tend to limit the inclusion of new ideas from the Working Group at large and not result in a distillation of a broad spectrum of ideas. It further runs the risk of having a Working Group Chair monopolize the process to his/her own advantage.

8.3- The End Run Method

It is the express goal of this organization to derive and publish standards and recommended practices. If the Working Group is not producing enough data or able to arrive at any form of consensus through the above methods, the Working Group Chair should be encouraged to find an alternate method of developing a standard or recommended practice or disband the Working Group. Alternate methods or Plans will most often involve soliciting outside sources to create a proposal. Plans might include convening an ad-hoc an expert in the field to work independently of the Working Group to develop a full proposal. In any case, the goal is for the Working Group Chair to assist these outside resources in completing a reasonable and practical proposal. If an End Run Plan is considered, the Working Group Chair must submit it to the Steering Committee for approval. If approved, the Steering Committee will expect to be kept apprised of activity and status both internal and external of the Working Group process. If a reasonable proposal arises from the Plan, it should be submitted to the Working Group with a call for serious objections, etc (see method 1 above). Advantages: This method will almost always yield a proposal of some kind. Narrowing down the list of contributors (perhaps to one person) makes reaching consensus much easier. The proposal is also very likely to be practical because the Working Group Chair has presumably chosen some one (or ones) who have an in-depth understanding of the problem and real world concerns as to how it is solved. Disadvantages: The proposals generated by this method are not as likely to represent a broad spectrum of opinion and could even be subject to self serving, myopic and/or competitive advantage oriented tactics. There is also a good to very good chance that the Working Group will be isolated from the process, which must not be encouraged. The End Run method is, therefore, to be undertaken with caution, with extreme diplomacy or as a last resort.

Working Group Creation Form (Example)

Members wishing to create a new work group should complete this Working Group creation form and submit it to the Steering Committee. The following form is a good example to follow:

Working Group Name or topic: [description]

WG Chair/Vice-Chairs: [name(s)]

WG Members: [at least 3 members to start, including the chair(s)]

Date of Submission: DD/MM/YYYY

1. Describe the topic and purpose (goal) of this WG:

2. Describe the motivation behind (for example, benefit to the market) addressing this topic:

3. Describe the current situation (technology, market influence, etc.):

4. Describe the proposed completion schedule for the group (if applicable):


Back to the Localization SIG Main Page: http://www.igda.org/wiki/Localization_SIG

Retrieved from "http://wiki.igda.org/Localization_SIG_Guidelines"
Personal tools