Create a cloud service for InDesign where files can be worked on by numerous people at the same time. Will help save time and encourage collaboration. Like Google Docs, Slides, etc.
Thanks for making this request. In order to understand the use-case more better I have a few questions:
1. Whats the role of the different people working collaboratively on the same file. Are they always only designers or are other personas also involved.
2. What is the use-case here, some parts of this request suggest an Editorial collaboration whereas others suggest collaboration amongst different designers. I am trying to separate these 2 requests out.
3. What are the different kind of files (brochures, books, magazines etc) for which this is required.
4. Does it need to be a web based service, or having the user be able to collaborate on one shared file using InDesign or InCopy on the Desktop will work? What is the advantage you feel over a web-service over the desktop app?
5. How do you workaround this need today? What are the most important problems with the current workaround?
Also still interested in this, despite the date of this. Same issues. I have the need to collaborate locally (or off a server location not a part of adobe creative cloud) for some files that span between designers of different teams, but also sometimes from an editing and design relationship.
projects can vary from illustrative infographics to longer editorial layouts intended for both digital and print. Indesign and also illustrator could benefit from this. My current workaround is 2 people sitting side by side, but only one gets to drive. Or..... someone works on a local file of one half of the document, while another works on the remaining half.... then both halves take turns moving into a combined third document.
Danny Weston commented
I know this is an old thread, but I am still curious about this. Google Docs is a great example. I am in a publishing setting too. I must admit, having the same problem as Anne-Marie Concepcion makes me feel like a much better InDesign user. (manly fangirl squeal)
Thomas Hallgren commented
That someone at Adobe needs to ask for a use case scenario IS the problem. Okay then, like GOOGLE DOCS.
Brian Hassett commented
This is terrible that multiple users cannot work on the same file. What is this, 1985 or something? This technology has been readily available for decades! What is this Adobe amateur hour?
This is mind-blowingly 3rd rate that I can't collaborate . . . on something you misleadingly call the Creative Cloud.
How is this possible?
Does anybody read this?
Lindsey Thomas Martin commented
Javed, I believe you are correct that there are two use cases. I'll call them  editorial and  collaborative.
 Editorial, when editorial, design and production work with authors, in-house or out of house, who have written a piece that will be published under their names. In this case, it is important that changes to the text and design be clearly presented to the authors on the proofs, their correxions included, and their approval of final page proofs secured. Tracking changes and controlling versions is very important as lawsuits are possible if such a piece is published and the author discovers correxions not made or unapproved changes after publication.
 Collaborative, when writers, editorial, design and production, often some in house and others out of house, work to produce a publication and/or a set of collateral assets for an organisation. The chief needs here are, I think, for a tracked but flexible exchange of ideas and suggestions as the products are written, designed, and produced.
Would one service fit both cases? Possibly, though I think the collaborative workflow is where you will find the low-hanging fruit, for reasons put forward in the discussion of import and export of comments between ID and PDF. We run both workflows in parallel though, at the moment, the editorial uses sequential proofs in PDF sent via e-mail, and the collaborative relies heavily on face-to-face meetings.
regarding your questions here my feedback:
1. Different cases are possible. Designers are on group of users, editors (text & picture), translators, reviewers, too.
2. both can be possible
3. In my eyes mostly bigger once, like the things you mentioned. But smaller once, like flyer can occur, too.
4. Wether is is web based or file based is a question of use cases. Designers with InDesign don't need a web based service in first place. Web based services are much more interesting for editors, e.g. that create texts for more channels, than print.
5. Its differs from the use case. Problems today: Only one person can work at an indesign file at a time. Editors need InCopy, that require at least some kind of introduction. Today editors often use word or collaborative tool, like GoogleDocs – for that there is no good way of integration without plugins or any mechanism for updated content.
I totally agree with Anne-Marie! I was also really disappointed to find the InDesign/InCopy workflow collaborating via E-Mail. I was searching an hour for "Save the inCopy-file in the CC)! And now I'm wondering if there's no comment from an adobe-staff since September 20 … This is not a really lively forum. Just a few posts … this must be possible … But it seems like no one take care of the users-opinion … :-( And the user doing a good job in delivering adobe new ideas and showing them how far away they are from competitors cloud-services …
Georg Stadler commented
We try to implement this right now in our publishing house. We are trying very hard to make an Indesign/Incopy workflow work with a team spread out over the country. It's hard right now.
Anne-Marie Concepcion commented
Once again I'm dealing with a magazine client who moved to CC for Teams so they could all use the CC Files workspace for an InDesign/InCopy workflow, in lieu of a shared server. They are bitterly disappointed that this logical place to store live publication files doesn't work reliably with check-in/check-out etc. They're going to try GSuite next, which is what they're all using, no fileserver in site. They are totally cloud-based. The "Creative Cloud" name led them astray. I would love to see this rectified.