Skip to toolbar

Community & Business Groups

Proposed Group: Document Services Community Group

The Document Services Community Group has been proposed by Adam Sobieski:


Document services are a generalization over services for documents such as: spelling checking, grammar checking, proofreading, fact checking, and mathematical proof and argumentation checking. Document services are relevant to both document authoring and document reviewing scenarios.

Imagine being able to check, in real-time, if a document has any informational, warning, or error messages with respect to its factuality or any steps of its reasoning. Tools for authoring and reviewing documents, in these regards, would be useful across sectors, across industry, academia, military, and government, with specific applicability to journalism, encyclopedias, digital textbooks, and science.

This community group will discuss document services and explore standardization, in cooperation with other groups, towards facilitating document services.


You are invited to support the creation of this group. Once the group has a total of five supporters, it will be launched and people can join to begin work. In order to support the group, you will need a W3C account.

Once launched, the group will no longer be listed as “proposed”; it will be in the list of current groups.

If you believe that there is an issue with this group that requires the attention of the W3C staff, please send us email on site-comments@w3.org

Thank you,
W3C Community Development Team

4 Responses to Proposed Group: Document Services Community Group

  • Hey,
    it sounds like these areas that are currently covered by the Editing Taskforce that has been in existence for a number of years. It’s a bit unclear to me why a new community group should be established for this. Would you care to elaborate why this work cannot take place in the Editing Taskforce?

    Reply

    • PD: My comments related to the grammar and spell checking and technical aspects of interacting with a document that is changing. If this community group is also to work on more social aspects, such as how one can get a human being to fact check a given document, networking aspects on how to send and receive asynchronous requests with response times such as several hours, or AI aspects on how to make a computer aware of the contents of a document and how to check that against a database of knowledge, then those are other different aspects that are not related to the Editing Taskforce.

      Reply

      • Thank you. Looking forward to working with the Editing Taskforce / Working Group as this Community Group launches. Also relevant is the Open Annotation Community Group.

        I had been thinking about automated software tools for performing document services but could also explore longer-duration asynchronous protocols, or multi-channel protocols (e.g. sending document authors emails when a human team has performed a document service, etc).

        Reply

  • Jindřich Kolman

    Fact-checking is *possibly* touching on something i’d like to promote: https://github.com/karlicoss/promnesia/

    It is a web browser extension that provides a sidebar. It monitors what URL you are visiting, cleans up the URL, and queries a locally-running server for any notes you may have stored about the URL. We have of course seen other similar attempts over the years, so it would be nice to possibly finally standardize on some lowest-common-denominator “page annotation” data format, and more importantly, it would be nice to promote this extension and try to keep it alive over the years. Would this significantly lower the barrier for projects attempting to enter the “read write web” space?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Before you comment here, note that this forum is moderated and your IP address is sent to Akismet, the plugin we use to mitigate spam comments.

*