Project

General

Profile

Review process » History » Version 11

Lukas Vonlanthen, 17 May 2016 14:15

1 1 Kurt Gerber
h1. Review workflow
2
3 2 Kurt Gerber
4 9 Kurt Gerber
5 11 Lukas Vonlanthen
{{thumbnail(20160517_workflow.png, size=1200)}}
6 3 Kurt Gerber
7
8 2 Kurt Gerber
9
*(to be revised)...
10
11 1 Kurt Gerber
The workflow when submitting a new Questionnaire or editing an existing one is as follows:
12
13
14
15 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
h2. Create
16 1 Kurt Gerber
17 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
|_.Create | Edit | Review | Publish |
18 1 Kurt Gerber
19 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
* Any logged in +user+ can create a new Questionnaire.
20
* A welcome notice explains the workflow, takes the user to the first section of the Questionnaire.
21 1 Kurt Gerber
22 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
h3. Questionnaire status:
23 1 Kurt Gerber
24 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
* -
25 1 Kurt Gerber
26 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
h3. Available actions:
27 1 Kurt Gerber
28 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
* -
29 1 Kurt Gerber
30 10 Lukas Vonlanthen
31
32
h2. Edit
33
34
| Create |_.Edit | Review | Publish |
35
36
* A Questionnaire object is created when saving the first section of a new or edited Questionnaire.
37
* Edit of existing Questionnaire:
38
39
  * Only a +compiler+ can edit existing public Questionnaires *(?)*
40
  * Editing a public Questionnaire creates a new version.
41
* The User becomes the +compiler+ of the Questionnaire.
42
* While editing a section of the Questionnaire, the entire Questionnaire is locked so no other editors can make concurrent changes.
43
44
45
h3. Questionnaire status:
46
47
* *@draft@*
48
49
50
h3. Available actions:
51
52
53
*[Submit]*: The +compiler+ can submit the Questionnaire to be reviewed. The status of the Questionnaire changes to @submitted@. Reviewers are notified, see below for how reviewers are selected.
54
55
* Permissions: +compiler+
56
* Notifications: +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
57
58
59
*[Invite Editors]*: The +compiler+ can invite other users to work on the Questionnaire. Invited users will be +editors+.
60
61
* Permissions: +compiler+
62
* Notifications: +compiler+, +editors+
63
64
65
*[Change Compiler]*: The +compiler+ can assign an +editor+ as the new compiler of the Questionnaire. The original compiler becomes an editor.
66
67
* Permissions: +compiler+
68
* Notifications: +compiler+, +editors+
69
70
71
h2. Review
72
73
| Create | Edit |_.Review | Publish |
74
75
76
h3. Questionnaire status:
77
78
* *@submitted@*
79
80
81
h3. Available actions:
82
83
84
*[Approve]*: The +reviewer+ approves the Questionnaire and submits it to be published. The status of the Questionnaire changes to @reviewed@. Publishers are notified, see below for how publishers are selected.
85
86
* Permissions: +reviewer+
87
* Notifications: +publisher+, +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
88
89
90
*[Revise]*: The +reviewer+ finds that some content of the Questionnaire needs to be revised. The status of the Questionnaire changes to @draft@.
91
92
* Permissions: +reviewer+
93
* Notifications: +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
94
95
96
*[Reject]*: The +reviewer+ can completely reject a Questionnaire if the content is obviously not appropriate. The status of the Questionnaire changes to @rejected@.
97
98
* Permissions: +reviewer+
99
* Notifications: +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
100
101
102
*[Assign Reviewer]*: The +WOCAT secretariat+ can assign an additional reviewer for the Questionnaire.
103
104
* Permissions: +WOCAT secretariat+
105
* Notifications: +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
106
107
108
h2. Publish
109
110
| Create | Edit | Review |_.Publish |
111
112
113
h3. Questionnaire status:
114
115
* *@reviewed@*
116
117
118
h3. Available actions:
119
120
121
*[Approve]*: The +publisher+ approves the Questionnaire and publishes it. The status of the Questionnaire changes to @public@. The approved version is inserted in Elasticsearch (replacing older ones). Any old version receives status *@inactive@*.
122
123
* Permissions: +publisher+
124
* Notifications: +publisher+, +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
125
126
127
*[Revise]*: The +publisher+ finds that some content of the Questionnaire needs to be revised. The status of the Questionnaire changes to @draft@.
128
129
* Permissions: +publisher+
130
* Notifications: +publisher+, +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
131
132
133
*[Assign Publisher]*: The +WOCAT secretariat+ can assign an additional publisher for the Questionnaire.
134
135
* Permissions: +WOCAT secretariat+
136
* Notifications: +publisher+, +reviewer+, +compiler+, +editors+
137
138
139
140
141
h2. How are reviewers and publishers selected?
142
143
This covers how new @submitted@ Questionnaires are assigned to +reviewers+ and new @reviewed@ Questionnaires are assigned to +publishers+.
144
145
* Rules can be added to automatically assign Questionnaire to their +reviewers+ or +publishers+. These rules are based on:
146
147
  * Project: All Questionnaires with a certain project are assigned to a specific +reviewer+ or +publisher+.
148
  * Country: All Questionnaires with a certain country are assigned to a specific +reviewer+ or +publisher+.
149
150
<pre>
151
  # Pseudo-code of such a rule: 
152
  if project == 'Project XY' and country in ['Country A', 'Country B']:
153
    reviewer = user_A
154
</pre>
155
156
* If no rule applies for a Questionnaire, they are assigned the +WOCAT secretariat+, which can either review / publish themselves or assign them to other users. _This is the current workaround until the proper review process is in place._
157
158
159
h2. UNCCD flagging
160
161
UNCCD users (focal points) need to possibility to flag existing WOCAT Questionnaires as "UNCCD Best Practice".
162
163
* When registering, UNCCD users select the country for which they are the focal point.
164
* +WOCAT secretariat+ checks if the user is indeed the current focal point for the specified country based on an up-to-date list of focal points provided by UNCCD.
165
* If the focal point for a country changes, UNCCD immediately informs the WOCAT secretariat so the focal point can be changed.
166
* UNCCD focal points can flag WOCAT questionnaires as "UNCCD Best Practice". They can only to this for Questionnaires in countries for which they are the focal point. 
167
* Flagging automatically creates a new @submitted@ version of the Questionnaire which will go through the usual review cycle.
168
* Focal points can only remove the UNCCD flag of Questionnaires which he flagged himself. *(?)*
169
170
171 1 Kurt Gerber
172
*Missing*: "revise" decisions need to be logged somehow. It should be possible to pass messages from user to user (eg. users submitting comment for the reviewer or reviewer submitting comment for the editors when "revise").