From PKP Wiki
Revision as of 12:58, 16 February 2009 by Jmacgreg
Milestone 3.0 (Current - Q4 2009)
- Development of a common framework for all PKP software.
- See Modularization of PKP Systems for details.
Milestone 2.3 (Current - Q4 2008)
- Timeline refinements
- Registration refinements
- Enable Session Types to be identified
- Title Browse list refinements
Proposed for Future Release
- UI refactoring, most likely congruent with the proposed common framework development. See bug 2848 for one example, although this is a much larger issue than just buttons.
- On the conference timeline, it is possible to close author registrations while submissions are still open. That should remain possible, but some kind of warning prompt would be ideal: "Do you really want to close author registration before the submissions are closed? Y/N".
- Add support for full bilingualism - interface and content
- Reword "path" in setup (not an absolute path, but an abbreviation). Perhaps the abbreviation should just be used by default.
- We need to provide some way to mass e-mail ACCEPTED authors only. Right now, the only option is to e-mail all authors, which becomes awkward about halfway through the management process of the conference (repeatedly needing to find and de-select the rejected authors).
- Add a "sent mail" email log for the CM.
- When a registrant pays, have the system generate an email receipt.
- Ability for the Director to rapidly assign papers to reviewers. For example, from the list of papers, make it possible to check off a group of papers and press an "Assign to Reviewer" option, which would pull up a list of Reviewers. Select one, hit Go and that would be it.
- Incomplete submissions should not go to the "unassigned" queue.
- Support for panel submissions.
- Add a warning on the final stage of the submission process indicating that by clicking on the button the submission will be complete.
- Add flexibility to include multiple options for the type of presentation being proposed.
- Make Blind Reviews optional, allowing Conference Managers to decide whether or not to include author information in the Submission Metadata, visible to the Reviewer.
- Add flexibility to include more personal information from authors (e.g., title/rank/status of the individual, such as professor, student, professional, etc.)
- Add a "review-lite" workflow option that simplifies/reduces the peer-review aspects and allows conference directors to focus on using
OCS as an access, scheduling, and general logistical tool for their conference.
- Add a "collaborative review" workflow, where selected reviewers receive all submissions
- Ability to export abstracts, user data, etc. into a tab delimited and/or XML format for manipulation outside of OCS.
- Export list of unpaid registrants.
- When a user logs in with NO role, some kind of useful message should be displayed. For example:
Would you like to:  Submit a proposal  Register as a conference reviewer  Register to attend the conference
This would help cut down on the many questions around this issue.
- Ability to set up as a single, one-off conference site
- Allow Conference Manager and Director role to be merged for a simpler option
- Add a budgeting module, which would allow conference managers to track conference expenses and generate cost reports.