Tag: Feature request

Currently, the first workflow state is "solicited." This allows editors to create a stub or placemarker for the eventual essay. The next state is "markup," where we would mark up an actual submission.

Currently, an essay is marked up and then moved to "draft." It is unclear what tasks are performed at this state before it is moved to "under review." We agree that it might be that a thread editor wants to check for errors in markup before sending it out for review, but that was the only task we could agree on. Otherwise, the state seems redundant. Solution: eliminate draft, move all existing "draft" essays to "review." For the future, essays are saved as "under review" once markup is complete.

Hi, currently thread editors can't edit texts in their own thread. We'd like to make that possible. Thanks, Ryan

Hi Ewan, (I also emailed this). After looking at a couple of possible examples of what "gatherings," might mean, this is the approach I think we've settled on. I've included two examples for your reference, one based on links for Joe (to have something new for the launch), and one based on an old gathering, which will be a model for how our old gatherings should be adjusted to fit the new format.

Create an uploads directory and http upload form for managing raw essay files online.

From Joe: The idea here, is that 'gatherings' are encountered in an organic way, without interrupting the reading process. Editorially, we will be inviting /every/ ebr author, when we accept an essay, to send Ryan a list of his or her essays on the internet.

In the past, secondary-threads had their icon display slightly apart from the the main icon. I might be missing it, but it looks like there is no visual representation of secondary threads on the new website. If that is the case, I think it would be nice to get something equivalent to the old website display on the new website.

On the main page, some of the icons blend together. I like the new, simple look of the icons, but I was thinking that a thin (1px) black border around each might help to visually distinguish them from one another.

Ewan, I just tried to test this by creating a new user (RMB) to whom I assigned a "reviewer" status. However, even as "reviewer," this user cannot see any content but what is published, so they can't contribute "reviews" of any texts, even those in the Under Review stage. Before this is fixed, I can't really tell whether the problems below are fixed. Thx - Ryan Please test. Thx. Hi Ewan, Can you make blurbs invisible to peer reviewers, in addition to the author field?