AreaAudit

Which languages each generator says it supports, and where

The document layer, and why it decides usability

The documents a generated pipeline hands to people, outlines, breakdowns, descriptions and shot lists, decide whether a crew can work at all. Their language is the least documented thing in this category. As of 2026-09-12.

Where the translation work goes when nobody publishes thisIf generated outlines and descriptions arrive in a language the room does not read, the tool has not removed the translation step. It has moved it downstream to a director or a designer, working to a deadline and less equipped for it than a translator.Script analysisRead by a writer or producerTranslated firstA delay before anythingstartsEpisode outlineRead by a directorTranslated underdeadlineDecisions made from arough versionShot descriptionRead by a designer or operatorOften not translated atallErrors enter the pictureThe translation step, moved rather than removedWhat each reader is left holding
Fig. 1 That is why this is a working condition rather than a convenience, and why it deserves a column of its own even when almost nobody fills it.
Who reads each generated document, and what a wrong language costs. Recorded 2026-09-12.
DocumentRead byCost of arriving in the wrong language
Script analysisA writer or producerThe analysis has to be translated first
Episode outlineA directorThe translation step moves downstream
Shot descriptionA designer or an operatorErrors enter the picture
Character descriptionA designerConsistency work becomes guesswork

Inclusion rule. The artefacts a generated pipeline produces for people to act on, with the consequence of each arriving in a language the room does not read. Order. Earliest artefact in a pipeline first.

1The translation step does not disappear, it moves

If these documents arrive in a language nobody in the room reads, the tool has not removed translation work. It has handed it to a director or a designer, who is less equipped for it and is working to a deadline.

That is why this belongs in a column of its own rather than as a footnote to the interface. It is a working condition, and for a non-English production it can decide whether a tool is usable at all.

2It is cheap to provide and cheap to document

Generating documents in another language is an instruction to a model rather than a voice that has to be licensed. It is the middle layer in cost, well below a voice inventory and above a translated menu.

Which makes the silence odd. It is the layer most likely to already work and least likely to be mentioned, so a buyer who needs it has to test rather than read.

3A rule is a better answer than a list

A published list of document languages would have to be maintained separately from the interface list and could drift out of step. A rule tying output to the interface setting cannot, and can be checked by anyone who can change that setting.

It is also shorter to publish, which removes the usual excuse. Any vendor whose documents follow a setting could say so in one sentence.

4What to test if nobody has published it

Generate one outline and one character description in the target language and read them. The question is not whether the words are right but whether the structural labels a pipeline depends on survived translation.

Those labels are often deliberately left in one language because downstream code matches on them. A crew reading a document full of untranslated field names is a different problem from a badly translated one, and it is the more common of the two.

An explainer about method and structure, not a count. No vendor number appears here that is not also in the register. The sourced material is on the register. Related: Figures that never expire, Three layers.