Reviewing a Draft Before It Publishes: Comments Inside the Content Writer
The content writer's comment plugin is editorial review on a Lexical article draft — a distinct mechanism from Drive's document-comment threads, not the same feature under a different name.
Draft-review-approve-publish is a workflow people specifically evaluate content tools on — Notion and Google Docs both market it directly, because "can someone leave feedback on this before it goes out" is a real, common requirement for any team producing content together rather than solo. Editor's content writer has this too, built as a comment plugin on its Lexical editing surface (frontend/apps/editor/src/features/content-writer/commenting/ and plugins/CommentPlugin/index.tsx).
Why this isn't the same feature as Drive's document comments
It's worth being precise here, because Piskes has two comment systems that could easily be assumed to be the same thing under two different names, and they aren't. Drive's document comments — covered separately — are built around a shared thread_id model: a comment thread is just a set of comment rows sharing an identifier, anchored to a specific cell or paragraph in a Univer document or sheet. The content writer's comment plugin is a different implementation entirely, built specifically for Lexical, the rich-text engine behind blog and article drafting. They solve a similar-sounding problem — leave feedback anchored to a piece of content — with different code, in different apps, on different underlying editors.
The reason this distinction matters practically: don't expect behavior you've learned from one to transfer exactly to the other. A workflow habit built around Drive's document-comment resolve behavior, for instance, isn't guaranteed to match how the content writer's plugin handles the equivalent action, because they're not the same feature wearing two different names — they're genuinely separate.
Using it for editorial review
The practical value here is specific to content review: a writer drafts a post in the content writer, an editor or reviewer leaves comments directly on the sections that need work, and the writer addresses them before the draft moves through the SEO panel and article settings toward publishing. Having that review conversation anchored directly to the draft — rather than in a separate chat thread or a Slack message that requires cross-referencing which paragraph someone meant — keeps the feedback loop tight and keeps a record of what was raised and addressed sitting right there in the draft's history.
The bigger picture
Editorial review inside the actual writing surface, rather than bolted onto a separate review tool, is what makes a draft-to-publish pipeline actually usable for a team rather than just a solo writer. That it's a distinct mechanism from Drive's comments isn't a limitation — it reflects that these are genuinely different tools, built for genuinely different kinds of content, each with review built in the way that content type actually needs it.