Hello Stepan Konev

The bilingual review process only works with the following files: the sdlxliff file, from which the bilingual review document was generated, and the bilingual review document in .review.docx extension.

I am not quite sure why you would like to use mxliff file directly in Studio?
It would work better if you could process the original source file in Studio, generated a bilingual review and then update the file from it.

Hoping to hear back from you.

Best wishes,
Greta

Hi Greta,

Thank you for your reply. I did not expect that but I will keep it in mind next time.

According to my understanding, Studio generates sdlxliff file(s) from any supported source file(s) be that docx or mxliff, right? If yes, then why can't it work with a "bilingual review document in .review.docx extension" from mxliff's sdlxliff, but with "bilingual review document in .review.docx extension" from docx's sdlxliff it can?

Both mxliff and docx files are supported. Both mxliff and docx files generate sdlxliff. Then why the bilingual review process only works with docx.sdlxliff but not with mxliff.sdlxliff? =)

The bilingual review process successfully generated the review.docx file from mxliff.sdlxliff either. However, the problem arises when it comes to importing back from the review.docx file. If it can't import, then why on erth it can export?

I used mxliff file directly in Studio because it is in the list of supported file types. I expected there would be no difference (be it docx, pdf, json or mxliff) as long as they are all declared as supported. Also, I expected that Memsource and Studio might have different segmentation rules, and I chose mxliff to avoid superfluous work that might arise from different segmentation. 

Hi Greta,

Thank you for your reply. I did not expect that but I will keep it in mind next time.

According to my understanding, Studio generates sdlxliff file(s) from any supported source file(s) be that docx or mxliff, right? If yes, then why can't it work with a "bilingual review document in .review.docx extension" from mxliff's sdlxliff, but with "bilingual review document in .review.docx extension" from docx's sdlxliff it can?

Both mxliff and docx files are supported. Both mxliff and docx files generate sdlxliff. Then why the bilingual review process only works with docx.sdlxliff but not with mxliff.sdlxliff? =)

The bilingual review process successfully generated the review.docx file from mxliff.sdlxliff either. However, the problem arises when it comes to importing back from the review.docx file. If it can't import, then why on erth it can export?

I used mxliff file directly in Studio because it is in the list of supported file types. I expected there would be no difference (be it docx, pdf, json or mxliff) as long as they are all declared as supported. Also, I expected that Memsource and Studio might have different segmentation rules, and I chose mxliff to avoid superfluous work that might arise from different segmentation. 

Problem is in your (mis)formulated original question, which sounds like you are expecting the original MXLIFF, not the SDLXLIFF created from the MXLIFF.
That's why Greta answered what she answered.

Oh, I thought it goes by default. There are no actions available until you convert your files to the sdlxliff format. Even if you try to uncheck the SDL XLIFF checkbox, a message appears 'You cannot disable the default bilingual file type'. There is just no other way for that. That's why I did not mention it. I'm sorry.