I agree with this being about workflows, not documents, but isn't branching and merging a workflow and storytelling tool?
It allows multiple people to work in parallel (and in private). When somebody sends a pull-request eventually, they are presenting a story of changes that they want to get into the document and people can discuss them and approve them individually. (Of course, git the tool isn't necessarily suitable for non-technical people, but git-the-workflow seems to be a good foundation.)
Could you elaborate on what such a tool could look like without git style branching?
I think the issue is that parallel workflow is a bridge too far for the current legal profession. They do sequential and they like it. A tool that makes the sequential workflow better will gain more ground than one that tries to change the process whole hog.
I have worked on several hundred of these types of contract processes in the last few years, and you are absolutely correct: sequential is where it's at for these situations. I have, however, encountered a few situations where time was an issue so I had two or three different versions out to different parties at the same time, and then merged the proposed changes where possible and sent out alternate versions where the changes differed. That process was... not fun, and could definitely use a more coherent workflow than manual merges or Word's built in merge features.
The anecdotes told here suggest that most think their work is sequential, while because a lot can happen asynchronously, hell situations happen all the time. Do you agree?
But the workflow only "looks" sequential, isn't it? In many stories told here a user may have inadvertently revert clauses to old versions and this can be missed. This happens because it is also an asynchronous work.
arcstudiopro.com is a collaborative screenwriting app written in ClojureScript (runs in the browser and Electron). There are lots of interesting problems to work on, from designing or building no-frills but user-friendly signup forms, to experimental onboarding UIs, or writing generative tests for our operational transforms offline support. The backend is written in Clojure, too.
Please also get in touch if you're familiar with quill.js internals.
Highland is macOS only and more of a minimal editor built around the fountain format (think markdown for screenplays), and has a very unique formatting UI.
Arc Studio Pro wants to support the full process and offers collaborative editing, automatic versioning, feedback management, outlining and visualization tools, etc.
Both apps offer a free version, so give them both a try.
It's true that the space is really crowded, but we also felt that all the other tools focused on formatting and not much else.
We wanted to consider the whole screenwriting process: collecting first ideas, outlining, distraction-free writing and formatting, collaborating, requesting and managing feedback, versioning...
Also, we want to take collaboration and versioning much much further than any existing tool and accommodate complex workflows, especially for larger writing teams. We're just getting started... :)
It's true that the space is really crowded, but we also felt that all the other tools focused on formatting and not much else.
I think you need to do your homework again. Formatting is by far the smallest part of what most of your competitors offer. For example, WriterDuet offers collaborative screenwriting, and has--for at least 2 years. WD and FD have also offered versioning for at least a few years, and include "revision" pages for changes made to scripts after production has already began. Both of these programs have already been used to write Hollywood movies collaboratively.
We wanted to consider the whole screenwriting process: collecting first ideas, outlining, distraction-free writing and formatting, collaborating, requesting and managing feedback, versioning...
Almost every single one of your competitors already does this...Celtx and Final Draft even add production planning capabilities to the mix (though FD requires paid addons for that functionality). Did you actually use any of them before you decided to jump into this market? It sort of seems like you didn't do you homework and decided that just because you were a programmer you could design things better than the people who actually use these for a living. (FD, WD, and Celtx were all designed--and in the case of WD and Celtx were also programmed--by people who earned their living writing screenplays or producing films.)
We do plan to offer backups to Google Drive and Dropbox, i.e. you can have your screenplays placed there automatically and periodically, to avoid data lock in.
Or are you thinking of a closer integration, e.g. being able to edit from Google Docs?
Not edit from Google Docs, but have the original stored in Drive, utilizing Drive's own built-in revision history. And even have it be an "Arc Studio" filetype, that when double-clicked would open the webapp directly.
I'm just very Drive-centric, not sure what your userbase is like, but it would just feel very natural to have my screenplay files next to all my Google Docs and Sheets files where I write/track everything else for every project of mine.
I've often had the same experience, people's workflows are pretty ingrained (in general, not just screenwriters). But I've done some pitches where a writer had a lightbulb moment, and realized that collab and versioning really would make things easier.
I put great emphasis on the app behaving similar to current screenwriting tools, and the collaboration/versioning features just being there when they are needed, so the change in somebody's workflow can happen gradually.
I'm curious which approach you had considered. And would love to get feedback from writers/filmmakers of all backgrounds: m@arcstudiopro.com
I work for a movie production company and have been thinking of creating something similar - especially the collaborative and versioning feature as in github for screenwriting. If you like I could ping you via E-Mail as well, since there are some features crucial for (at least our) workflow. Revision aka colored (replacement)pages, excerpts for set dressers etc.
But so far it looks really great and I hope it'll be able to replace Final Draft at our company someday.
CelTx has most of those features already. Last time I checked them out they were working on collaborative features; I don't know if they've released those yet.
WriterDuet already has collaborative features--indeed, that was the original goal of the app. It also includes support for replacement pages and everything else you've suggested that you need.
I'm especially interested in learning about production company workflows. Our tech was designed with team workflows in mind and we plan to add such features soon. Would be great to get your feedback on what we have planned.
First off, amazing job - the UX design is outstanding. I've been wishing for something like this for music composition for the longest time, something that would combine the ease of use and live-collaboration aspects of Google Docs with custom workflows and object types as you have here. (Unfortunately, the presentation layer for the music domain requires implementing an entire DAW or notation interface on top, both of which are herculean efforts that I haven't tried to tackle yet!)
That said, I'll probably end up using this for lyrics! (When I used to write for musical theater in college, our writing workshop would basically use Google Docs, using screenplay formatting and typesetting in all caps for singing. This would have revolutionized the workflow there, even without music-specific features. Individual songs have "beats" and evolving themes just like anything else!)
On the tech side, did you use something like https://github.com/jahfer/othello for OT, or roll your own? And do you think in hindsight that CLJS was the right language/toolset for the job? I've always been interested in its ability to treat immutable data as a first-class citizen, but I haven't had a chance to do it yet.
Not sure about your future plans, but there's a huge need for good collaborative writing/editing programs for traditional book publishing. Collaboration with developmental editors, copyeditors, agents, publishing staff, etc is both essential and extremely painful.
From the looks of it, the structure and output needs for book projects are less demanding than what you've already implemented, so it might be a worthwhile adjacency to explore.
Yes, we're definitely going to support formats other than Hollywood-style screenplays in the near future. Would be great to learn more about the needs for collaboration in book publishing.
Happy to share anything you need - feel free to reach out whenever you like. My email is firstname at firstandlastname dot net, or @joshkaufman on Twitter.
Hi Michi, you say the app is written in Clojure(Script), does that mean the desktop Windows and Mac versions are in Electron, or are you using something else?
Not an Electron hater here, I use VS Code (along with Emacs).
I thought it was great that screenwriters already had a notion of version control – once a screenplay goes into production, later revisions receive a color and are referred to as such, e.g. blue draft, pink draft. Pages that contained changes used to be printed on appropriately colored paper.
The idea of our app is to build on that notion and offer automatic versioning.
It allows multiple people to work in parallel (and in private). When somebody sends a pull-request eventually, they are presenting a story of changes that they want to get into the document and people can discuss them and approve them individually. (Of course, git the tool isn't necessarily suitable for non-technical people, but git-the-workflow seems to be a good foundation.)
Could you elaborate on what such a tool could look like without git style branching?