Difference between revisions of "Talk:PubMan Quality Assurance"

Latest revision as of 10:38, 10 January 2008

This page gathers feedback by the pilots and early adoptors, that was given so far and that will be given for future releases. Please feel free to add your own feedback here and sign your comments with a signature (see menu bar above).

Feedback on the functional specification[edit]

Configurability QA-Workflow[edit]

Approval: formal Quality Assurance may/must be independent of scientific Quality Assurance.

Approval: scientific Quality Assurance may/must be independent of the future data output; the process of scientific Quality Assurance on institute/department/group level is managed in many different ways and has to be representable.

It should be possible to turn off the Quality Assurance.

General Question: Who decides whether or not Quality Assurance should take place? MPG or MPIs?

It should be possible to limit the QA to specific Genres or full text types.
- Configurability of QA in relation to Genres (e.g. presentation slides and posters) is possible via system filters for customizable fields.

Comment Nicole: was a comment by Natasa in Bugzilla. Natasa, is this still the case that it is possible like that? --Nicole 11:04, 10 January 2008 (CET)

The obligatory system immanent Quality Assurance is put into question. The questions, along with other critical points, will be submitted to sInfo LA.

Comment Nicole: What is the status of this point? --Nicole 11:04, 10 January 2008 (CET)

SQA should be started in parallel to the FQA.

MPG-external publications: no quality control.

Scientists can make their publications visible on the Homepage without quality control. Full texts can also be made visible by the scientists. But they can be revised by the rights manager.

Which changes require new QA?
- Upload of new data (Rights checking)
- Metadata (formal control)

Formal Quality Assurance (FQA)[edit]

Multi-level FQA should be optional.

FQA must run again after each change of the metadata.

Scientific Quality Assurance (SQA)[edit]

It should be possible to disable the Scientific Quality Assurance through the system.

The Depositor must mention in the item, if it is already published ; so that these items can eventually be excluded from Quality Assurance.

Every time a file is changed, the SQA has to run.

Peer model[edit]

What is happining in case when one Moderator/Autority in the peer QA process (FQA, SQA) is changing the publication item:
- Option 1: Changes do not need to be accepted by other Moderators/Authorities, i.e. the process runthrough for this pub item is continued -> Problem: Not all Moderators/Authority accepted the finally released item
- Option 2: Changes need to be accepted by other Moderators/Authorities, i.e. the item "goes back to QA start"

Withdrawal of data records[edit]

Withdrawn items should be excluded from the search index.

Comment Nicole: Already implemented. --Nicole 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)

It should be possible to explicitly search for withdrawn items.

Comment Nicole: Could be part of the Expert search for PubMan admins. --Nicole 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)

Withdrawn items should not be part of catalogs, but it should be possible to put them into baskets.

Usually, a file that is once visible with PID should remain visible. In some cases though, e.g. legal actions by a publisher, an item with PID will habe to be made invisible again (which equals a reduction of access level). How is then to be proceeded?

Comment Nicole: for my understanding the current specification meets this need. Items can be withdrwan, which means that the item can only be accesed via ID and which also means that the full text can't be opened anymore. --Nicole 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)

Withdrawn items should not be searchable or exportable. Only the administrator should still have access to the full texts

If a user accesses a withdrawn item via link, he gets a message that the item is withdrawn. The metadata set is shown to him, but not the full text. This is to be taken into consideration when a PID-method is chosen.

Comment Nicole: in the current specification the file and the name of the file is not being shown. --Nicole 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ==Feedback on the functional specification==
-===Configurability QA-Workflow / Konfigurierbarkeit QA-Workflow===
+===Configurability QA-Workflow===
-* Acknowledgment: formal Quality Assurance may/must be independent of scientific Quality Assurance.
+* Approval: formal Quality Assurance may/must be independent of scientific Quality Assurance.
-(Zustimmung: formale Qualitätssicherung kann/muss unabhängig von wissenschaftlicher Qualitätssicherung erfolgen)
+* Approval: scientific Quality Assurance may/must be independent of the future data output; the process of scientific Quality Assurance on institute/department/group level is managed in many different ways and has to be representable.
-* Acknowledgment: scientific Quality Assurance may/must be independent of future data output; the process of scientific Quality Assurance on institute/department/group level is managed in many different ways and it has to be graphic.
+* It should  be possible to turn off the Quality Assurance.
-(Zustimmung: wissenschaftliche Qualitätssicherung kann/muss unabhängig von zukünftiger Datenausgabe erfolgen; Prozess der wiss. Qualitätssicherung wird in Instituten/Abteilungen/Gruppen sehr unterschiedlich gehandhabt und muss abbildbar sein )
-* Turning off Quality Assurance should be possible.
-(Qualitätssicherung soll abstellbar sein.)
 * General Question: Who decides whether or not Quality Assurance should take place? MPG or MPIs?
-(  Allgemeine Frage: Wer entscheidet, ob Qualitätssicherung stattfinden soll? MPG oder MPIe?)
-* Quality Assurance should be limited to specific Genres or full text types.
+* It should be possible to limit the QA to specific Genres or full text types.
+** Configurability of QA in relation to Genres (e.g. presentation slides and posters) is possible via system filters for customizable fields.
+:: ''Comment Nicole: was a comment by Natasa in Bugzilla. Natasa, is this still the case that it is possible like that? --[[User:Nicole|Nicole]] 11:04, 10 January 2008 (CET)''
-(Qualitätssicherung sollte auf bestimmte Genres oder Fulltext-Typen eingeschränkt werden können.)
+* The obligatory system immanent Quality Assurance is put into question. The questions, along with other critical points,  will be submitted to sInfo LA.
+::''Comment Nicole: What is the status of this point? --[[User:Nicole|Nicole]] 11:04, 10 January 2008 (CET)''
-* Configurability of QA in relation to Genres (e.g. presentation slides and posters) is depicted in the system filters for customizable fields.
+* SQA should be started in parallel to the FQA.
-( Konfigurierbarkeit der QA in Bezug auf Genres (z. B. Vortragsfolien und Poster) ist im System über Filter auf customizable fields abgebildet.)
-* Questions have arisen as to the process of the obligatory system-internal Quality Assurance. The questions, along with other critical points,  will be submitted to sInfo LA.
-(Der Prozeß der verbindlichen system-immanenten Qualitätssicherung wurde in Frage gestellt. Die Frage wird zusammen mit anderen kritischen Punkten dem sInfo LA vorgelegt)
-* SQA and FQA should be able to start parallel to each other.
-(SQA sollte parallel zur FQA gestartet werden können)
 * MPG-external publications: no quality control.
-( MPG-fremde Publikationen: Keine Qualitätskontrolle)
-* Scientists can -also without quality control- make their publications visible on the Homepage. Full texts can also be made visible by the scientists. But they can be revised by the rights manager.
-(Wissenschaftler kann seine Publikation ohne Qualitätskontrolle auf der Homepage sichtbar machen. Volltexte können auch vom Wissenschaftler sichtbar gemacht werden. Kann aber von Rightsmanager revidiert werden.)
+* Scientists can  make their publications visible on the Homepage without quality control. Full texts can also be made visible by the scientists. But they can be revised by the rights manager.
 * Which changes require new QA?
-(Welche Änderungen erfordern neue QA?)
 ** Upload of new data (Rights checking)
+** Metadata (formal control)
-(Upload neuer Daten (Rights checking))
+===Formal Quality Assurance (FQA)===
+* Multi-level FQA should be optional.
-** Metadata (formal control)
+* FQA must run again after each change of the metadata.
-(Metadaten (Formale Kontrolle))
+===Scientific Quality Assurance (SQA)===
+* It should be possible to disable the Scientific Quality Assurance through the system.
-===Formale Qualitätskontrolle (FQA)===
+* The Depositor must mention in the item, if it is already published ; so that these items can eventually be excluded from Quality Assurance.
-* Mehrstufige FQA sollte optional sein.
-* Bei jeder Änderung der Metadaten muss die FQA erneut durchlaufen werden.
-===Wissenschaftliche Qualitätskontrolle (SQA)===
+* Every time a file is changed, the SQA has to run.
-* Wissenschaftliche Qualitätssicherung über das System sollte ausschaltbar sein.
-* Depositor soll am Datensatz kenntlich machen können, ob der Datensatz bereits veröffentlicht wurde. Damit diese Datensätze eventuell aus der Qualitätskontrolle ausgeschlossen werden können.
-* Bei Änderungen der Dateien muß zusätzlich die SQA durchlaufen werden.
 ===Peer model===
@@ Line 68: / Line 47: @@
 ** Option 2: Changes need to be accepted by other Moderators/Authorities, i.e. the item "goes back to QA start"
-===Withdrawal von Datensätzen===
+===Withdrawal of data records===
-* Sollen zurückgezogene Datensätze bei Suchen, bzw. Exporten berücksichtigt werden? Nein.
+* Withdrawn items should be excluded from the search index.
-* Eher direkte Abfrage nach zurückgezogenen Datensätzen gewünscht.
+:: ''Comment Nicole: Already implemented. --[[User:Nicole|Nicole]] 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)''
-* Sollen zurückgezogene Datensätze in Catalogs und Baskets einbezogen werden können? Catalogs nein, Baskets ja.
-* Normalerweise muss eine einmal sichtbare Datei mit PID immer sichtbar bleiben. Es wird Fälle geben – z. B. rechtliche Schritte eines Verlages, in denen selbst ein Item mit PID wieder unsichtbar (entspricht Reduzierung des Zugangslevels) gemacht werden muss. Wie ist dann zu verfahren?
+* It should be possible to explicitly search for withdrawn items.
-* Zurückgezogene Items sollen weder suchbar noch exportierbar sein. Nur der Administrator sollte noch Zugriff auf den Volltext haben.
+:: ''Comment Nicole: Could be part of the Expert search for PubMan admins. --[[User:Nicole|Nicole]] 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)''
-* Der Benutzer, der von außen direkt auf einen zurückgezogenen Datensatz zugreift, bekommt eine Information, dass der Datensatz zurückgezogen ist. Er bekommt nur den Metadatensatz aber nicht den Volltext angezeigt. Dies muss bei der zu wählenden PID-Systematik berücksichtigt werden.
+* Withdrawn items should not be part of catalogs, but it should be possible to put them into baskets.
+* Usually, a file that is once visible with PID should remain visible. In some cases though, e.g. legal actions by a publisher, an item with PID will habe to be made invisible again (which equals a reduction of access level). How is then to be proceeded?
+:: ''Comment Nicole: for my understanding the current specification meets this need. Items can be withdrwan, which means that the item can only be accesed via ID and which also means that the full text can't be opened anymore. --[[User:Nicole|Nicole]] 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)''
+* Withdrawn items should not be searchable or exportable. Only the administrator should still have access to the full texts
+* If a user accesses a withdrawn item via link, he gets a message that the item is withdrawn. The metadata set is shown to him, but not the full text. This is to be taken into consideration when a PID-method is chosen.
+:: ''Comment Nicole: in the current specification the file and the name of the file is not being shown. --[[User:Nicole|Nicole]] 11:38, 10 January 2008 (CET)''