Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Incubation: Proofreader API (Issue #1146)

christianliebel left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1146)

@QueenieZqq Thank you for this proposal. During our initial discussions, this question came up: **What is the core justification for a platform-level JavaScript API for proofreading?**

As mentioned in your design review request and your explainer, proofreading capabilities already exist across several layers:
1. User Agents: Most browsers provide built-in spellcheck and basic grammar tools.
1. Extensions: Services like Grammarly offer even more sophisticated corrections.
1. Operating Systems: OS-level features (e.g., Apple’s Writing Tools) provide AI-powered proofreading across all apps.

While we acknowledge that these existing solutions do not typically expose explanations or corrections to site authors, and there are certainly apps and users that would benefit from this kind of API, we wonder if the use case is common enough to justify a platform-level API, given the many alternatives that already exist.

We share your concerns regarding the user experience. If the site, an extension, the user agent, and the OS all simultaneously attempt to provide proofreading UI, the resulting interaction would be cluttered or distracting for the user. The explainer currently leaves this potential conflict as an open question.

Please note that this is not yet a formal review. We wanted to hear your thoughts on the core justification for this API before conducting it.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1146#issuecomment-3854298119
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1146/3854298119@github.com>