START HERE
Check completeness first, then language and critical details, then structure and layout in the intended office application. A file opening successfully, similar page counts or matching paragraph totals cannot establish a correct translation on their own.
Check content coverage
Use the contents list and pages to inspect body text, headings, tables, captions, headers, footers and notes. List image text and unusual objects excluded from processing; do not label unprocessed content as complete.
Compare with the source for omissions, duplicates and displaced passages. Pay particular attention to tables across pages, merged cells and text boxes. In a bilingual file, check the pairing between source and translation rather than merely the presence of both languages.
Review high-impact details separately
Check models, amounts, dates, percentages, units, names and contact information. Inspect negation, scope, conditions and responsibility. A correct number can still be attached to the wrong unit, object or period.
For example, ‘within 30 days of delivery’ and ‘within 30 days of ordering’ contain the same number but impose different conditions. Record the source location, problem and proposed correction rather than only writing ‘inaccurate translation’.
Inspect format-specific structure
In Word, inspect heading levels, lists, headers, footers, contents and page breaks. In Excel, check sheet names, column labels, cell types, formulas and displayed values. In PowerPoint, inspect overflowing text boxes, chart labels, notes and font substitution.
These are delivery-review checks, not a promise that every complex object is supported. Record limitations where content is uneditable, unusually laid out or interpreted differently by the destination application, and agree on a correction method.
Sign off the reading view and revision
Open the file in the recipient's actual application and device. Inspect legibility, cut-off content and missing glyphs. Editing, printing and presentation views may differ; check the view relevant to the intended use.
Keep one version awaiting approval and separate resolved from open issues. Record languages, source revision, translation revision, review scope and approver. Documents requiring specialist judgement need an appropriately qualified reviewer rather than automated checks alone.
A practical comparison
| Layer | Inspect | Example issue |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Sections, captions, tables, notes | Page 4 caption untranslated |
| Meaning | Terms, numbers, conditions, negation | Wrong starting point for payment period |
| Structure | Lists, formulas, text boxes | Table 2 formula replaced by text |
| Layout | Wrapping, overflow, fonts, pagination | Page 8 heading clipped |
Before you sign off
- Record review scope and exclusions.
- Compare high-impact details, not just fluency.
- Inspect editing and reading views in the destination software.
- Keep open issues, approved revisions and reviewers traceable.
Frequently asked questions
Is a fluent translation enough?
No. Fluent wording can still change numbers, conditions or the relevant object. Compare it with the source.
Does an identical page count prove layout fidelity?
No. The same number of pages can contain overflow, missing text, displaced content or untranslated objects.
Scope and related product information
This guide explains preparation and review; confirm current format support and service scope before processing.
Examples in this guide illustrate a review method, not a customer case or a performance result. Product availability changes with version and account configuration.
AI document translation and bilingual delivery | Yuzhu Cloud →Current clients and installation guidance →