I don't think they're ignoring it, they've just been focusing on solving the algorithmic problems before diving into UX problems. Loro, for instance, has recently shifted their focus towards conflict merging following their 1.0 release. It's simply a question of building a solid foundation before making it user friendly.
A gramatically aware text CRDT? At least aware of words and sentences? I'd be curious to hear whether that's been tried, and if it solves any issues or produces new ones.
I think it's just a UX problem. Once that is solved, which I believe is definitely possible, both CRDTs and git can be made much more user friendly. I'm not saying it's easy, because it hasn't been solved yet, but I don't think the right people have been working on it. UX is the domain of designers, not engineers.
As crabmusket said [1], I think the C should stand for Commutative, as it apparently did once. Commutative Replicated Data Types, conflict management optional.
Writing code and writing literature are curiously similar. It begins with thinking, both structured and creatively. Breaking a story down into pieces while keeping the bigger picture, and making a plan for how to approach it. Then comes the difficult metamorphosis where abstract ideas/concepts are turned into concrete words/code.
Good literature/code is concise, expressive, even beautiful. It doesn't come about easily, but takes time. The author reshapes and refactors the text until it meets some standard that the author aspires to, often revisiting it days later to read it with fresh eyes. Then it's committed for review, and may still have to be reworked a bit.
I agree with those who say that coding is more art than engineering. At least if you're really good at it.
Yours sincerely,
CRDT fanboy