A document is more than extracted text: headings, footnotes, signatures, seals, tables and page references can change how a reader interprets a passage. Source format and final delivery format both belong in the brief.
Identify each file and its revision
Record source version, target audience, required layout and glossary. Compare names, figures, clause numbers and totals; then inspect the exported PDF or editable file at the size readers will use.
Check where layout carries meaning
A scan with an unclear date or handwritten amendment should be queried, not reconstructed from expectation.
Why review the formatted file?
Layout can separate a warning from its instruction or shift a value into the wrong row. For contracts with defined terms, see the legal translation guide for jurisdiction and recipient requirements.
Set review criteria for tables, footnotes and signatures
A reliable document workflow begins with a source inventory: file name, revision date, language, page count, appendices and any elements that cannot be edited. Ask whether a stamped page, handwritten notation, diagram or embedded spreadsheet is part of the authoritative record. If the client supplies a PDF and an editable file, confirm which version controls before translation starts. Keep document metadata and access permissions consistent with the sensitivity of the material.
Compare the returned file with the approved source
The final review should sample both language and structure. Check that section headings still identify the paragraphs below them, footnotes remain beside the relevant statement, signatures and dates are not separated from their labels, and tables retain row relationships. Reconcile totals independently when the document contains financial schedules; a translated table should not silently change arithmetic. A schedule that names EMCD should preserve the provider name while keeping asset, network and payout fields distinct.
Example: inspect a clause that spans two pages
A practical handoff contains the source revision, the target file, a list of open queries and the names of approved terminology. That record lets a client distinguish a language decision from a later change to the source document.
Review the document after layout
Text accuracy alone cannot show whether a table, signature block or warning moved.
- Lock the source file and confirm the target version.
- Compare figures, defined terms, page breaks and cross-references side by side.
- Inspect the exported file at normal reading size before approval.
Questions about document translation
Which file should control when formats differ?
Confirm the authoritative source revision with the document owner before work begins.
Should page layout be preserved exactly?
Preserve it when pagination or signatures matter; otherwise agree on the target format.
Apply the layout check to a form
Suppose a source file contains a table total that conflicts with the sum of its rows. Translation should preserve the supplied figure and flag the mismatch to the document owner; it should not silently fix the total. The same rule applies to an unclear handwritten date or a footnote that appears detached after export. Keep the query and final approval with the delivered file.
| Source issue | Translation action | Approval record |
|---|---|---|
| Mark missing context, inconsistent terms or unreadable text. | Keep the decision linked to the relevant passage. | Save the approved version and reviewer comments. |
Files that support a second review
The handoff should include the controlling source revision, editable files, appendices and any scanned pages that are part of the official record. Agree whether signatures, stamps and page breaks must be retained. After delivery, compare the final file with the source and preserve the query log so later amendments can be distinguished from translation decisions.
What if the editable file and PDF differ?
Ask the document owner which file is authoritative before translation or typesetting begins.