3 ms·
This is interesting, but I think it kind of fails to take its audience into consideration. 1) It assumes writers write like programmers code. This isn't true.
by dylandrop 13y ago
This is interesting, but I think it kind of fails to take its audience into consideration.
1) It assumes writers write like programmers code. This isn't true. At least with scripts, what typically happens is the writer will write an entire script, send it to their boss for revisions, and then rewrite it. They would consider it a pain in the ass if they had to make "commits" for every page they wanted to add, and especially if their bosses had to review each change (mostly because bosses are executives who just want to leave their mark by making unnecessary changes on things).
2) In either book or script writing (or whatever) small grammatical changes are unimportant, and there will be way more of these than we would care to look at. Who cares about reverting a change of "its" to "it's"?
I see this kind of thing as being useful for writing an informal, informational book in the form of an extended blog post (see http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ http://gettingreal.37signals.com/) but otherwise, I can't really see it being that useful for professional writers.
Also, something that I think would be REALLY useful (that I'm honestly surprised I haven't seen is a Final Draft - meets - Google Docs (screenplays editable by multiple people via online, all stored online). Dunno if anyone's seen anything like this.
Sources: My dad is a TV writer.
- gcb0 13y agoi try to get my SO to write academic essays in applications that have history or diff viewing... but never had any success. but that only means the current offerings are bad. even for programmers. regarding your points, when i set up `meld` to show the text she sent vs what her professor or coleague sent back, she is amazed. So there is usefulness. Second, have you ever used Kwrite in KDE? you don't have to commit or anything. just type. and it shows the diffs marks on the left. pretty hand. and avoid commits and all. about point #2, just make branches and tags more practical. Also, try to merge back those 'word fixes' in other branches ' heads. would be awesome even for programmers. source: optimist :)
- baby 13y agoExactly. I don't care about the document progression or the changes of words. I just want "versions" and "notes". I actually did a writing application for myself only and I had two windows, one on the left with the actual text, one on the right with the notes, also a sidebar with the chapters and progression of the book.
- cauthonLuck 13y agoScientific writers do write like programmers code. There are as many as ~15 authors on a paper. The scientific paper has intensive markup, often in Latex. And collaborative writing like GoogleDocs doesn't work b/c 3 different authors will make changes to the same sentence and you need to be able to see all three changes next to each other. Not to mention figures, equations, etc... MS Word and Libre office aren't powerful enough for scientific writing and aren't universally embraced or consistent across operating systems. Github for writers is desperately needed. Draft doesn't do nearly enough Source: physical science graduate student
- natejenkins 13y agoHey, I'm working on a similar project for scientific writing. You can find the link in my profile along with my email. We have had success with large collaborations working on it, 15 authors should not be a problem. Check it out and feel free to contact me.