Workflow Transitions need some more options

Issue #39 new
Thomas Rois created an issue

In the current state of Term Transition Workflows, unless you are a reviewer, you can not transition. This is not exactly how this works in a big company: You have two big stakeholder groups: The ones who work on definitions (Editors), and the ones who do qualitychecks/approve them. (Reviewers).

Typically, a new term will be created by an editor and defined with the help of various other Stakeholders, and once that is done, it will go towards approval from the reviewers. To do and manage this, we have states and transitions.

New: Editor has created the Term and is Working on it.
Proposed: Editor has finished working on the Term and has given it over to Reviewers
Approved: Reviewers have finished reviewing and officially published the term.
Needs Work or rather In Revision / New Version: Either the editor or the reviewer has set the term to be edited again.

[New] → [Proposed] would typically be done by an editor themselves
[Proposed] → [Approved] by a reviewer
[Proposed] → [Needs work] either by reviewer (not good enough) or editor (change things up before final review)
[Approved] → [Needs work] would be done by an editor when they need to start a new version, or if any mistake is found later on by a reviewer.

To be able to create this kind of workflow, but also to do more stuff if needed (like 2-step-approval), it would be optimal to have either:

  1. Each status is configured to which group can transition into this status.
  2. Each transition is configured to which group can transition like this.

The first one should be easier to implement with the current user interface.

Also, two minor nitpicks on workflow transitions:

  1. It is not localised to other languages. Since you can customise it, its not a big deal, but we had to customise it after our upgrade to glossary 4.
  2. The rejected status “needs work” should not have a checkmark symbol, rather a question or exclamation mark, to differentiate it from a positive state. Best option would be to have this cutomizable per state, a preset of like 5 different symbols ( ✓, ? , ! , -, + ) would be sufficient.

Comments (0)

  1. Log in to comment