Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Scenario 1: Annotate original value in object record

Description:

This is the case when user just wants to comment the original value.

Performed Actions

  1. The user searches for an object record
  2. The object record is found and the user opens it
  3. The user browses the object record and positions himself to an object item
  4. The user browses the list with discussions for the selected object item
  5. The user creates new post on a selected discussion for the original value of the object record

Result:

  1. The discussion indicator for the annotated item is increased
  2. The discussion in which is made the new posting is displayed on the top of the object discussion area (Discussions in discussion area are sorted by Date: Time of last post)
  3. For the newly created post is kept information about: the researcher who made the post, the name of the project in which the researcher participates, the date and time when the post is made, the status of the post, etc.

Scenario 2: Propose new value. There is existing original value.

Description

In this case the user wants to propose a new value, result of his research on a data object. For example, he discovered during his research that the painter of a painting is different than the originally proposed.

Performed Actions

  1. The user searches for an object record.
  2. The object record is found and the user opens it.
  3. The user browses the object record and positions himself to an object item. The object item requires thesaurus value.
  4. The user reviews the list with other proposed values (versions of the original item)
  5. The user proposes new value
  • Data entry fields are opened where the user selects from a thesaurus the value he proposes and the status of proposed value
  • The user browses the list with discussions for the original value and all its versions and either selects an existing discussion and makes a post in it or starts a new discussion.
  • The user saves the proposed value

Result

  1. The version indicator for the selected object item increases
  2. The discussion indicator for the selected object item, the original value, increases (either the discussion counter or the post counter, depending on the whether the user started a new discussion or posted on an existing one).
  3. The discussion indicator for the newly proposed value increases (either the discussion counter or the post counter, depending on the whether the user started a new discussion or posted on an existing one)
  4. For the newly created version is kept information about: the researcher, who proposed the value, the project , the date and time when it is proposed, the status of the version.
  5. If a new discussion is started, then it is linked to the proposed value.
  6. If a new post in an existing discussion is made, then it is linked to the proposed value.
  7. The newly proposed version is saved and is visible for all team members under the original value.
  8. The newly proposed value becomes visible for external users only after being published.
  9. The newly proposed value never replaces the original value.
  10. When a user searches for an object record, then the original version of the record will be displayed. All versions could be additionally reviewed.

Scenario 3: Propose value. There is not existing original value.

Description

This is the case when an object record does exist and some vital information for it is missing – for example the name of the painter or the year when the painting is created. A research project is started for these missing points and the researches come to an consensus about them.

Performed Actions

  1. The user opens a link of the record from a discussion, data basket, wiki page, etc.
  2. The object record is displayed.
  3. The user browses the object record and positions himself to an object item. The value in the item is missing.
  4. The user reviews the list with other proposed values. There could be values prposed from other team members.
  5. The user proposes new value  - This may still require validation from a vocabulary (thesaurus/ authority)
  • Data entry fields are opened where the user enters the value he proposes and the status of proposed value
  • The user browses the list with existing discussions on all versions and either selects an existing discussion and makes a post in it or starts a new discussion.
  • The user saves the proposed value

Result

  1. The version indicator for the selected object item increases
  2. The discussion indicator for the selected object item, the empty value, increases (either the discussion counter or the post counter, depending on the whether the user started a new discussion or posted on an existing one).
  3. The discussion indicator for the newly proposed value increases (either the discussion counter or the post counter, depending on the whether the user started a new discussion or posted on an existing one)
  4. For the newly created version is kept information about: the researcher, who proposed the value, the project , the date and time when it is proposed, the status of the version.
  5. If a new discussion is started, then it is linked to the proposed value.
  6. If a new post in an existing discussion is made, then it is linked to the proposed value.
  7. The newly proposed version is saved and is visible for all team members under the empty value. Only the version indicator indicates that that there are proposed values.
  8. The newly proposed value becomes visible for external users only after being published.
  9. Question: Is it possible the newly proposed value, when published, if it is first (there are no other published versions), to become original, with information of course for the researcher, project, organization, etc? NO - the riginal is nothing

Scenario 4: Enter new values in a list

Description

This is the case when a user wants to add new record in a list. For example there is new exhibition in which the painting is placed, and the list with exhibitions must be updated. The user is not changing an original value, he is just adding new valid values. Is this the same as adding a completely new value - above)

Performed actions

  1. The user searches for an object record
  2. The object record is found and the user opens it
  3. The user browses the object record and positions to the list with items
  4. The user captures the required values in the list
  • A data entry form is opened, where the user enters the values required for new record in the list
  • The user selects the status of the new record. The status is selected once for all values in the list
  • The user starts a new discussion where he gives detailed explanations for the new record in the list (Probably it is not necessary to comment, when a brand new value is added in the list).
  • The user saves the values

Result

  1. The status, selected during entering values in the list, though selected once for the whole record is assigned to each individual value.
  2. For each one of the newly created values in the list is kept information about: the researcher, who entered the value, the project/ organization, the date and time when it is entered, the status of the value.
  3. The record in the list could be edited and deleted by the author and the project admin before being approved and published.
  4. The new record in the list is visible only for the team members of the current project before being approved and published.
  5. After the RS Project Admin approves the newly entered record in the list, and after it is published all values in the record become with status “Original”. This means that this new record in the list becomes part of the original version of the record.

Two more

1. The user adds a completely new field that is available form the template. i.e. the source did not include the field but the field is part of the superset of fields for that record type. The user could add the field and value. Question: Would this be counted as an original. Probably not.

2. The user does not search for the record but gets to it another way, eg a link from a discussion, data basket etc.

 

Labels:
None
Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.
  1. Oct 27, 2011

    Comment in Scenario 4: Is this the same as adding a completely new value - above)?

    1. We propose Scenario 4 to be treated differently than Scenario 3, because: If we add a new exhibition in the list with exhibitions, and the new data about the exhibition is treated like adding new value in an empty node to the original record (scenario 3), this would mean that when values are published they will be displayed in the original record for the other users as new proposed versions, and they are actually not. Of course for each value in a list could be proposed new one. For example if we create for a painting a record in the list with exhibitions about an exhibition in National Gallery, London from May, 2010 till October, 2011 and there is another user who thiks that at that time the painting was in National Gallery, Canada then a new version will be created.
    2. We have to strictly identify which lists should allow entering new records, and for which could only be proposed new values.

    The user does not search for the record but gets to it another way, eg a link from a discussion, data basket etc.

    I incorporated this in Scenario 3, did not created new one.