Closed mbjones closed 5 years ago
Original Redmine Comment Author Name: Saurabh Garg (Saurabh Garg) Original Date: 2005-09-06T15:16:18Z
Correction in the previous description. This is not required:
'A new action should be created for moderator login? action=login can not be used here because Metacat has to be told to check if the user is a moderator or not. Hence either a new action has to be created. Or a new arguement to the login action has to be *created.'
Moderators can be handled in the same way as administrators are handled currently. That is when an action is requested, it can be checked if a user is moderator or not.
Original Redmine Comment Author Name: Matt Jones (Matt Jones) Original Date: 2005-09-08T15:32:53Z
I agree with all of the steps you outlined. However, the layout of the moderation resultset was discussed as well. We want the moderation process to be as quick and easy as possible. So we might consider a system where the moderation form (accept, decline, revise, explanation) is in the EML document itself (possibly rendered on the left side in its own iframe). When the moderator makes a decision, he bonks the button and is automatically brought to the moderation page for the next document.
Original Redmine Comment Author Name: Saurabh Garg (Saurabh Garg) Original Date: 2006-01-19T19:13:10Z
Moderator UI and functionality for ESA has been implemented. Waiting for feedback from ESA and next round of changes. Hence, moving the bug 1.7
Original Redmine Comment Author Name: Callie Bowdish (Callie Bowdish) Original Date: 2008-06-02T19:37:58Z
When checking ESA mail response for Metacat release I notice that the email path has problems on the revise document. Here are too examples:
Dear Callie Bowdish,
Upon review, we feel that the metadata entry for your article submission, Test ESA edit Mon June 11:37, is still missing some relevant information. Please read the reviewer's comments below for any suggested additions and changes. You are strongly encouraged to go back and address these issues with your entry. You can login, edit, and resubmit your entry at http://chico.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/register-dataset.cgi?stage=modify&cfg=esa&docid=esa.3.
The Ecological Society of America
Reviewer's Notes: This looks good, Callie. Please add a little more in the methods section.
Callie
The path for some reason does not go to the latest version number even though the "docid=esa.3". Usually when there is not a version number the version goes to the most recent data package. This path opens the data package in the online form but it is name esa.3 with no version number. If the user works with the address posted in the email they will not be able to save because there is already a version older than that one.
I am not sure if this is just on the test server.
The ESA email for when the data package is accepted says:
Dear callie bowdish,
We are happy to inform you that the metadata entry for your article submission,
Test ESA on Chico, has been accepted. This part of the submission process is now
complete. Your metadata entry can be cited in the future as
The Ecological Society of America
The
Original Redmine Comment Author Name: Callie Bowdish (Callie Bowdish) Original Date: 2008-06-02T20:04:08Z
Here is the error that show up on the current production server 1.8.0 when using the email link after logging in. Failure An error occurred. Please check the list of errors below:
* Next revision number couldn't be less than or equal 2
* Failed while updating.
Click the button below to return to the form and fill in the required fields. Do NOT use the back button on your browser. Submit the description again when you are finished.
Original Redmine Comment Author Name: Redmine Admin (Redmine Admin) Original Date: 2013-03-27T21:19:22Z
Original Bugzilla ID was 2176
Author Name: Saurabh Garg (Saurabh Garg) Original Redmine Issue: 2176, https://projects.ecoinformatics.org/ecoinfo/issues/2176 Original Date: 2005-09-05 Original Assignee: Saurabh Garg
Implement the moderator UI and functionality..(MODERATE) -- Sid
Detailed Notes describing this functionality
-> The first step in the life cycle of a registry entry is document insertion by the author. For this the author should have a ldap account. Issue: Should links to the ldap account creation be provided from the ESA home page?
-> When the document is created it does not have public read access. ToDo: Modify the register-dataset.cgi to not give public read access for the documents created. ToDo: The document has to viewed/deleted by the moderators. Hence all the moderators should have all permission on the document. Issue: Should email alert be sent to the moderator? To the author also with instructions for viewing and editing the document?
-> Once the document is created, it has to be queued up for moderation. Hence when the moderator logs into the system, he/she should be directly taken to a search page which displays ToDo: Create a new login page for the moderator ToDo: Check that login/logout functionality for the moderator is working in the skins. ToDo: A new action should be created for moderator login? action=login can not be used here because Metacat has to be told to check if the user is a moderator or not. Hence either a new action has to be created. Or a new arguement to the login action has to be creater. Metacat has to read the moderator list from metacat.properties and it should check if the specified user is part of it.
-> Once the Metacat has checked that a user is a moderator, the moderator should be forwarded to the search page. The search page should show all the documents which do not have public read access with links/buttons for viewing, accept, decline and revision of the document. ToDo: Modify Resultset.xsl to have the above links/buttons. ToDo: Accept leads to modification of the document to have public read access, the document is updated in the repository and an email is sent to the author ToDo: Decline leads to a page where the moderator can spefiy reason for declining. Then the document is deleted and an email is sent to the author with the reason. ToDo: Revision leads to a page where the moderator can spefiy reason for requesting revision. Then an email is sent to the author with the reason.