Bug 7568 – Competing Interests aren't strictly required after enabling the requirement

Bug 7568 - Competing Interests aren't strictly required after enabling the requirement

Summary:

Competing Interests aren't strictly required after enabling the requirement

Status:	NEW

Product:	OJS
Classification:	Unclassified
Component:	Journal Management
Version:	2.4.x
Platform:	All All

Importance:	P3 normal
Assigned To:	PKP Support

URL:

Depends on:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2012-06-14 16:30 PDT by James MacGregor
Modified:	2013-01-02 12:03 PST (History)
CC List:	2 users (show)

See Also:
Version Reported In:
Also Affects:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Description James MacGregor 2012-06-14 16:30:29 PDT

In Journal Setup Step 3 I can enable Competing Interests by clicking "Require submitting Authors to file a Competing Interest (CI) statement with their submission", and optionally by clicking "Require Reviewers to file a CI statement with each peer review they submit." Enabling these options does add the CI statement field to the relevant areas, but these fields are not strictly required, and can be overstepped. They should be required.

Comment 1 James MacGregor 2012-08-27 15:38:47 PDT

Releasing this one back to the pool -- I can figure out how to check an individual field locale-wise, but I'm not sure how to do this when also passing through an array (that is, as this field is a localized field for 1+ authors, necessitating using the FormValidatorArray AND FormValidatorLocale options on one field ...)

Comment 2 Alec Smecher 2012-08-28 09:15:03 PDT

Removed problematic escaping (see CI field)
https://github.com/pkp/pkp-lib/commit/efe715284fb7536a4f19188b204dff70087b51e3

Comment 3 Alec Smecher 2012-08-28 13:39:25 PDT

Deferring -- there is no "the CI field is required" locale key currently in translation.

Comment 4 Alec Smecher 2012-09-25 13:24:48 PDT

Deferring again; no translation round for 2.4.1.

Comment 5 Alec Smecher 2013-01-02 12:03:31 PST

Likewise for 2.4.2.