  Collaborative editing (CE) became increasingly common, often compulsory in
academia and industry where people work in teams and are distributed across
space and time. We aim to study collabora-tive editing behavior in terms of
collaboration patterns users adopt and in terms of a characterisation of
conflicts, i.e. edits from different users that occur close in time and
position in the document. The process of a CE can be split into several editing
'sessions' which are performed by a single author ('single-authored session')
or several authors ('co-authored session'). This fragmentation process requires
a pre-defined 'maximum time gap' between sessions which is not yet well defined
in previous studies. In this study, we analysed CE logs of 108 collaboratively
edited documents. We show how to establish a suitable 'maximum time gap' to
split CE activities into sessions by evaluating the distribution of the time
distance between two adjacent sessions. We studied editing activities inside
each 'co-author session' in order to define potential conflicts in terms of
time and position dimensions before they occur in the document. We also
analysed how many of these potential conflicts become real conflicts. Findings
show that potential conflicting cases are few. However, they are more likely to
become real conflicts.
