Show HN: Revise – An AI Editor for Documents

Why Read This from an HCI Perspective

This article shows what becomes decisive for user experience (UX) when AI writing tools evolve from simple sentence generators to actual editing environments. Details like model selection, document editor architecture, shortcuts, selection ranges, and formatting preservation directly determine usability quality. For HCI/UX practitioners and researchers, it is a worthwhile case study of how generative AI is reshaping traditional document workflows.

CIT's Commentary

From CIT's perspective, this product is not just 'a document editor with AI bolted on,' but an experiment in reducing the interaction cost of document creation. The recurring feedback in top comments emphasizes that low-level interaction quality—focus persistence, selection consistency, platform convention adherence—matters more than the presence of features. Even with generative AI, users still judge by the predictability of everyday operations like cursor movement, selection, undo, and formatting propagation. The demand to 'not look like AI' or 'help write more clearly' suggests that reducing cognitive load may be the core value, beyond model performance. CIT believes evaluating such tools should consider not just output quality, but also friction in the writing flow, alignment with platform expectations, and how well it supports editorial judgment.

Questions to Consider While Reading

• Q.What editing interaction qualities must this editor guarantee before AI assistance to earn user trust?
• Q.If adding features for logic and clarity rather than sentence generation, what feedback method would be most useful?
• Q.How strictly should platform-specific shortcuts and selection behaviors be followed in a generative editor?