-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Description
Issue
RGPO have found that there is a difference in the data that Elements will display between a) an item deposited via subi/eScholarship with an active embargo, and b) an item deposited via Elements with an active embargo.
Actual
Embargoed items deposited via Elements clearly have set out the file(s) deposited (e.g. "AuthorsVersion.pdf") and will include the embargo date, whereas those deposited via subi have no information other than "metadata only record".
Expectation
The user's expectation is that the same information would be displayed for both types -- the number of files, file name, and embargo date.
Steps to reproduce
- User deposits item to subi with embargo. The item includes Co-author B who has Elements access.
- Co-author B accesses Elements and claims the item or sees it in their queue. Co-author B want to deposit to fulfill RGPO requirements, however they see what is pictured in Top screenshot. When they try to redeposit, they receive an error because Elements cannot overwrite subi-created publication data.
Note: In this case, RGPO was very insistent of making the deposit look like the bottom screenshot (Deposited via Elements w/ embargo). So I walked them through the process to unlink the subi deposit from Elements, deposit with an embargo, then link the two items again. I did not yet withdraw the duplicate originally deposited via subi, in order for us to have a working version to look at. You can see the result here:
Elements record: https://oapolicy.universityofcalifornia.edu/viewobject.html?id=2991801&cid=1
Deposited via Subi: qt0cw0z4m7
Deposited via Elements: qt0g78q9nx
Earlier https://trello.com/c/v5MKjCpQ
