When machine translation is and is not appropriate
In short
ISO 18587 defines requirements for full human post-editing of machine translation output. It is a legitimate workflow for high-volume, low-risk content — and it is not appropriate for certified documents that a government office or a court will rely on.
Official and legal documents are handled by human translators end to end. Numbers, names, dates and negations are exactly the elements machine output gets wrong in ways that read fluently, which is the worst failure mode for a document that will not be read again before filing.
Where post-editing is suitable, ISO 17100 and ISO 18587 set out the roles and the revision steps. Confidentiality is a separate consideration: source text must not be pushed through third-party engines without a lawful basis under PDPA B.E. 2562 (2019) and the client's agreement.
What we need from you
- Volume, subject matter and intended use of the content
- Whether any part will be filed with an authority
- Confidentiality constraints on the source text
- Existing glossary or style guide
Watch out
Using machine output for a certified document to save time. Certification means someone stands behind every line. Scope, turnaround and fees are confirmed by IVC staff by phone, LINE or email — this site does not publish prices.
Reviewed as of 2026-08-04. General guidance only, not case-specific advice and not a guarantee of outcome. Government fees, conditions and processing times are set by the responsible authority and can change. This site does not publish prices — please ask our staff.
ให้เจ้าหน้าที่ตรวจขอบเขตงานและเอกสารก่อนเริ่ม
สอบถามรายละเอียดและเงื่อนไขได้ทางโทรศัพท์ LINE หรืออีเมล