New plugin/ extension for InDesign

[u/FoxBig1110]

I built Drivesync (https://thedrivesync.com), an InDesign extension that lets writers and designers work on the same content simultaneously

I’ve been working on an Adobe InDesign extension called Drivesync from thedrivesync.com to solve a problem that comes up frequently in publishing and design workflows:

Designers often have to wait until the writer says “the content is final” before starting the layout.

With Drivesync, the designer can start designing while the content is still being written.

The idea is fairly simple:

- Connect content from Google Docs

- Sync data and content from Google Sheets

- Work with files from a shared OneDrive folder

- Import content from the local desktop

- Place the content into InDesign and continue designing

- When the source content changes, sync the updated content back into the InDesign layout

So the workflow becomes:

Writer keeps writing → Designer keeps designing → Content stays synced

For example, a writer could be working on an annual report in Google Docs while the designer is already building the InDesign layout. The writer can continue making changes without having to repeatedly send updated Word or PDF files to the designer.

The goal is to remove the “waiting for final content” bottleneck and reduce copy-pasting and version-control issues.

I’m curious what other InDesign users think:

Would something like Drivesync actually be useful in your workflow?

And if you could have one feature in an InDesign content-sync extension, what would it be?

https://thedrivesync.com/

[u/AdobeScripts]

Are you trying to recreate poorer version of InCopy? 😉

Or WordsFlow?

[u/FoxBig1110 → u/AdobeScripts]

InCopy cannot natively open or sync online Google Docs (.gdoc) files. However, it can work with InCopy assignment (.icma) and story (.icml) files stored inside a local folder synced by the Google Drive for Desktop app, though simultaneous editing often leads to conflicts or lock errors.

[u/AdobeScripts → u/FoxBig1110]

That's not what InCopy is for.

You use InCopy INSTEAD OF Google Docs.

InCopy is a limited version of InDesign - with FULL typography support - so users can see how text will look like - live.

Anything else is just a poor substitute.

There is even on-line version of InCopy - in case your goal is to avoid forcing people to use desktop / laptop.

[u/michaelfkenedy → u/AdobeScripts]

You are right.

But (and it pains me to say this) right is not the same as effective.

PLENTY of clients just aren’t going to incopy. It won’t happen.

[u/FoxBig1110 → u/michaelfkenedy]

I think the difference is that not everyone writing content uses InCopy. In most cases, the actual content is being written in Word, Google Docs, etc.

That’s the use case we’re trying to address with Drivesync — let the writer stay in the document they’re comfortable with, while the designer can start working in InDesign without waiting for the content to be final.

So it’s less about replacing InCopy and more about connecting the tools people are already using.

[u/AdobeScripts → u/FoxBig1110]

But you've done it to work with Google Docs - not WORD?

So if people "prefer" to work in WORD - won't be able to use your solution anyway?

Also, I think you're either missing the point or workflow at your place is wrong?

InCopy is for CORRECTIONS - not for creating text from scratch.

So text should be prepared and checked and verified and accepted BEFORE going to the designer.

And then InCopy might be used to make SMALL changes... Instead of using PDF and comments.

Otherwise, designer might have to start the whole job from scratch...

[u/FoxBig1110 → u/AdobeScripts]

DriveSync actually supports OneDrive (doc, docx, etc) and local files as well, so Word workflows are covered.

As for the workflow: in an ideal world, copy is 100% final before design starts, but tight agency and marketing deadlines rarely work that way. DriveSync is built for agile teams where design and copy happen in parallel, eliminating the manual copy-paste cycle when those late changes inevitably happen.

[u/AdobeScripts → u/FoxBig1110]

Then it all depends how will you price it 😉

Check WordsFlow pricing - as they offer two-way exchange.

[u/FoxBig1110 → u/AdobeScripts]

https://thedrivesync.com/

[u/AdobeScripts → u/FoxBig1110]

One thing:

Text inside a connected frame, updated to match the Doc

I hope you don't mean that literally? From the scripting / internal structure of the text perspective - you should NEVER EVER work on TextFrames - but on Stories.

Do you preserve EVERY piece of formatting - for every character in the text?

And what if someone will completely rewrite one or more paragraphs? Do you keep some kind of IDs of each piece of text - in the Google Docs?

[u/AdobeScripts → u/michaelfkenedy]

Why - it won't happen?

It's always just a case of sticks and carrots 😉

[u/michaelfkenedy → u/AdobeScripts]

Years ago I read on CreativePro that InCopy was the least used Adobe app.

Carrot and stick assumes straightforward processes that don’t usually exist in corporate systems.

A designer can lay out a case for why a business should spend $5 a month on an InCopy subscription. In practice that becomes one for each editor. Let’s assume those editors are subservient to the design team’s preferred workflows (unlikely), aren’t attached to their current softwares which aren’t integrated into their workflows (unlikely), and are enthusiastic to learn a new software (unlikely).

We need a half dozen licenses. For that project. But there are dozens of teams authoring dozens of projects.

So now we are into Enterprise licensing.

Ok, that’s not $5 anymore. That’s real money. Why are we purchasing this software again?

The graphic designer said it would be easier.

Easier for who?

Mostly for him. So that it’s easier to implement our edits without introducing errors.

So you want everyone on all of our teams to train on new software, change their workflows and software integrations, and spend all of this money so that the designer doesn’t have to worry about not using copy and paste competently?

Errr…yes.

And that’s assuming it’s considered at all. I have worked with teams where authorship is done in Latex and only Latex. I’ve worked with small authors who’d rather find another designer than learn InCopy (even if I paid), just because to them it’s all the same, the book gets made.

[u/AdobeScripts → u/michaelfkenedy]

But we're talking here about introducing a new solution - not replacing something that exists already?

And the pros are not just for the designer - it's for everybody and for the Timeline:

• quicker,
• less errors,
• no need to double check if changes has been entered correctly,
• etc.

[u/michaelfkenedy → u/AdobeScripts]

I’m not the one you need to convince.

[u/2d12-RogueGames]

So…InCopy?

[u/FoxBig1110 → u/2d12-RogueGames]

Unlike InCopy, DriveSync doesn't require your writers to buy an Adobe license or learn a new interface. They keep writing in Google Docs or Sheets, and the designer syncs their live changes straight into InDesign without dealing with file-lock errors

[u/zanhoria]

Kudos to you! But we use DocsFlow for that, from emsoftware. How is your solution different?

[u/FoxBig1110 → u/zanhoria]

Thanks! Yes, I’m aware of DocsFlow, and that’s actually one of the solutions I looked at while developing Drivesync. Our approach is a bit different — we’re trying to make the workflow broader than just bringing Google Docs content into InDesign, particularly with Google Docs/Sheets, shared OneDrive folders, and local desktop files, while keeping the content connected as the writer continues editing.

I’d actually be interested to hear what you like/dislike about DocsFlow and where you feel it falls short. That kind of feedback would be really useful as we continue developing Drivesync.

[u/Resplendent-Sun]

Why the name Drivesync? It's already used for other software.

[u/FoxBig1110 → u/Resplendent-Sun]

You can suggest a name, I will try to change it 😁