[alpyne]

From the introduction:

"After over a decade, however, CRDT solutions are rarely found in working co- editors or industry co-editing products, but OT solutions remain the choice for building the vast majority of co-editors. In addition, the scope of nearly all CRDT solutions for co-editing are confined to resolving issues in plain-text editing, while the scope of OT has been extended from plain-text editing to rich text word processors, and 3D digital media designs, etc."

[mkl]

I'm not sure what to make of that, though, as there seem to be quite a few different JSON CRDT libraries, for example.

Just after that it says "The contradictions between these realities and CRDT’s purported advantages have been the source of much debate and confusion in co-editing research and developer communities." That's kind of my question/confusion: people writing CRDTs really talk them up, and I can't tell what's true in practice. I have no way to judge the accuracy of this paper myself (I don't know enough to really understand it), so I'm hoping someone who knows this stuff in a practical way can shed some light on it.

[AnthonBerg]

I found that I could eventually power through the paper. I thought it was beyond me at first. Then I got angry and just shoved piece by piece into my head :) Not in linear fashion, and it didn’t happen quickly. Actully not that slow either once I got going. I found I was maybe rather more of a paper-reader than I assumed I was. Probably you too!!

[scofalik]

So, what is your conclusion after reading it?

[AnthonBerg]

I found the arguments convincing, and will be moving towards OT in general. From outside it feels like OT is generally closer to how I tend to think.