OJS Workflow: Submission Page

From PKP Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Introduction

The redesign of the editorial workflow, as developed for OMP and ported to OJS 3, has generated a number of suggestions. The UI/UX team will look at each of the 4 editorial pages in turn (Submission, Review, Copyediting, Production), but also as a whole, ensuring consistency between the pages (and the rest of the system).

Screenshots

caption

Issues

Some of the issues identified by the community include:

  • Workflow icons may be overlooked - Submission Metadata, Editorial History, Participants (CDL PPT, P51)
  • Better visual separation for each section and the application of numbering or more linear ordering to help users understand which areas of the page require mandatory activity and which contain only optional activity is crucial for users to be able to progress through these pages. (CDL Report, P87)
  • Work with a visual designer to create visual distinction between the file holding areas of a page vs. the action areas of a page (CDL Report, P. 87)
  • Addition of in-context instruction, description, and help will also aid users in comprehending what each section is meant to do (CDL Report, P. 87)
  • Create another entry target for additional file information. Perhaps a target that incorporates both visual and textual elements (CDL Report, P. 88)
  • To display the current stage or status of a submission, consider creating a separate status indicator that is visible on all article level pages in the editorial process. Consider placing this item in the same prominent location on each page. This indicator can change depending on the status of the article – whether it is “out for review” or “review is returned.” (CDL Report, P. 88)
  • In-context help or instruction is better displayed with separate question mark icons or “What’s this?” links. This ensures that users recognize that help is available to them (CDL Report, P. 88)
  • Move Files Through Editorial Workflow: The ability to keep all files together and move them from one section to another within OJS without downloading and re-uploading is a crucial activity to the editorial process. Make it clear in labeling if a file needs to be uploaded or if it can be moved from a previous stage. (CDL Report, P. 104)
  • The entire editorial and production flow should be re-designed in a linear and visual step-by-step numbered process that is outlined so that users can clearly see which steps lie ahead of them and how the steps will be completed. (CDL Report, P. 105)
  • The names of the file holding bins (Final Draft Files and Production Ready Files) need to be clearly labeled so that users understand that these are container areas and that the sections below are the functional areas of the page. (CDL Report, P. 105)
  • Consider creating one holding area across all editorial sections that moves with the user as they go through the editorial process. This would consolidatethe file container metaphor and make the functional areas of these sections stand out in a more prominent way. (CDL Report, P. 105)
  • The colours of the notes are not so clear for non-regular users and do not necessarily stand out. The hover-over text for sign-off notes are different from other notes (UP Report, P. 10)
  • The heading ‘considered’ for the column which triggers the acknowledgement emails is a bit odd. Also, the descriptive text “... which is then checked Considered after it has been consulted.” Is inaccurate, it goes green after the note has been consulted, and is checked ‘considered’ after the acknowledgement has been sent... ; Suggestion: Change to Acknowledged, like in OJS – and/or change the descriptive text. (UP Report, P. 13)
  • As an Editor making a decision, it is awkward to work your way down the page, and then have to scroll back to the top to press the buttons to make the decision. The decision buttons are styled like navigation; Suggestion: Move the buttons to the bottom of the page. Make the buttons into a pulldown select or radio button. (UP Report, P. 14).
  • The graphics next to the files are inconsistent, and unintuitive; Suggestion: Drop the images completely, it is not clear what they add, and they take up space in the row. (UP Report, P. 19)

Recommendations

summarize recommendations with links

See: OMP Workflow Revisions


Discussion

See "discussion" tab at the top of the wiki page.


Decision

To come.


Implementation

To come.