OJS Workflow: Copyediting Page

From PKP Wiki
Revision as of 08:24, 8 August 2014 by Kstranac (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


This section will focus on the Copyediting page.



The following PDF file presents a tour of the current (June 2014) Copyediting workflow.

File:OJS pre-3.0b Copyediting.pdf


Issues include:

  • The copyediting process needs to be simplified and structured more linearly. The document transfer/upload and checkbox processes are condensed into a horizontal display to save vertical real estate which only confuses users. Most users need a numbered, vertical and linear display in order to act on the proper steps for the copyediting processes. (CDL Report, P. 106)
  • The use of checkboxes to keep track of files and steps being taken, as well as trigger communication with users is a complex interaction. It would be clearer to users if the checkboxes served as confirmation of tasks or decisions only. The two processes need to be separated out from each other with clear call-outs explaining the significance of each step. (CDL Report, P. 106)
  • We did not cover this in testing however many users have let us know that they need to be able to upload multiple rounds of revisions during the copyediting stage so this functionality needs to be present in the system. (CDL Report, P. 106)
  • Copyeditor can approve files – but this is responsibility for the editor...? ; Suggestion: Allow only the editor to approve the files (UP Report, P. 26)
  • When the editor approves the copyedited file, and then sends the book to production, they have to re-tick the files for production; Suggestion: Pre-tick all approved copyedited files when sending to production. (UP Report, P. 27)


John's Design

summarize recommendations with links

See: OMP Workflow Revisions

John's version of a potential wireframe design for Copyedit stage, based on far more explicit labeling of steps and status.

Workfkow Copyedit Stage.png

The Copyediting Conversation

The conversation begins by the copyeditor clinking in #4 above on INITIATE AUDIT AND QUERY RESPONSE. The conversation involve sending out emails that include a "magic link" that takes users directly into the conversation, asking for or showing a response.

Screen Shot 2014-07-19 at 2.11.52 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-07-19 at 2.12.16 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-07-19 at 2.12.26 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-07-24 at 4.57.40 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-07-25 at 11.24.59 AM.png

Thought Experiments

Alec #1

Copyediting Rough Proposal.png

This is intended for some conceptual creative destruction and is not to be taken literally.

Key concepts:

  • Stays with 3-grid design; not as prescriptive or imposing
  • Permits responses on responses (to an arbitrary level of depth); responses may or may not include files
  • Responses include 3 states: pending (incomplete), approved, rejected
  • Rounds can be added to the copyediting grid; the tree of responses can be "pruned" into subsequent rounds to keep the conversation organized.
  • Files can arrive in "Production Ready" *only* by going through the Copyediting grid.

Alec #2

Key concepts:

  • Recasts the copyediting process around a set of "conversations", where the participants can be chosen for each and files and comments can be shared within them. These conversations can be used to organize multiple rounds, if desired.

Copyediting grids showing 3 separate conversations

Copyediting thought experiment 2a.png

Within one of these conversations, participants share files and comments

Copyediting thought experiment 2b.png

Bruno's wireframes

Version 1 (outdated)
  • The most important difference is that instead of grid 2 handling conversations, it handles tasks. The only users assignment to the task is the direct responsible for that, which is the copyeditor. The other users can be pulled into the conversation using the "to" and the "message template" fields, in copyeditor task view modal.
  • The interface to represent the conversation is just an example, it is not complete and should be better defined.

Copyedit.png Add copyedit task.png Copyedit task added.png Copyeditor task view.png Copyeditor task view modal.png Copyedit response.png

Version 2 (current)
  • Introduce the idea of forum discussions.
  • Introduce tutorials to explain the process to users.

The following wireframes just represent the copyeditor assignment and the copyediting tutorial.

Start.png Copyediting participants grid.png Add participant.png Add participant filled.png Added copyeditor.png More users to stage.png Draft content.png Queries.png Copyedited content.png

User Feedback

An initial test of the wire frames revealed:

  • the submission and/or file ID are important to show in grids;
  • use the revision number and maybe a sign of which type of revision is that (copyediting, review, etc);
  • clarify the "close" action inside the query modal, maybe use "exit" or "cancel"; also maybe close the query modal after we send a message, it was confusing for her sending the message and having to close the modal;
  • clarify the query files moving process (to draft or to copyedited);
  • maybe need private query option between users;


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


To come.


To come.