Define language variants as records
List the languages and locations the campaign needs, then give each variant a stable reference. Record who owns the wording in each language and who can confirm its suitability for the intended audience. A single translated text document can be a source, but it does not establish which version belongs to each artwork or site. Keep language, format and quantity as separate fields so a change in one dimension can be traced without renaming the whole project.
Prepare source wording before layout
Agree the source message and any mandatory names, dates, units or product terms. Identify which phrases require approved translation or specialist review. Preserve that content reference with its version. Do not let a layout constraint silently shorten or reinterpret wording. If text will not fit, ask the responsible content owner to approve an alternative. The designer can propose options, but the language decision remains attributable to the person authorised to make it.
Review each actual proof
Proofs should show the language in its final position and identify the variant being reviewed. Ask the relevant reviewer to check line breaks, characters, direction and approved content against the source. Visual and technical checks remain distinct. Avoid approving an English master and applying that decision to every language. Record which language variant is complete, conditional or still waiting, and bind its approval to the exact current file.
Worked example — fictional
A fictional four-branch campaign needs two English graphics, one Welsh graphic and one bilingual graphic. The Welsh content owner approves wording version W03, but the first proof uses W02. The discrepancy is corrected before artwork acceptance. The bilingual design needs another line, so the designer asks for a reviewed layout rather than removing a sentence. The packing matrix references the corresponding language and proof version at each branch. A change to one telephone number prompts review of every variant carrying it, without reopening unrelated approved content.
Common pitfalls
A font that displays source-language characters may not support every translated character; use an appropriate actual file and production check. Copying text from a past campaign can preserve expired dates or inconsistent destination names. A machine-generated translation is proposed content until its responsible review is complete. Language files should not inherit approvals from a visually similar variant merely because their filenames share a prefix.
Create a controlled multilingual handover
Export a matrix of language, format, site, approved content and artwork version. Include remaining questions and relevant ownership. Reconcile the matrix with the production quantity and packing list before release. Use proof notes to prepare the record, then obtain real approvals through the organisation’s accepted route. Preserve the accepted content sources so the next campaign can update them deliberately rather than translating uncontrolled copies again.
Take this to the next job
- Reference every language variant
- Name authorised content reviewers
- Version approved source wording
- Review every actual proof
- Reconcile language and site allocations
.jpg){kind=link}
