[FEATURE] Additional role/privilage only to assess publications through Yoda

[NikaVK]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

We would like to request adding an additional privilege, role just to asses publications. At this moment data managers can assess publications in Yoda. At WUR we structured Yoda@WUR so that a research group's data steward gains data managers' rights, which means they have the privilege to curate Yoda publications, but not necessarily the knowledge. That is why we suggest to introduce another layer, another privilege to be given to those with skills to curate and assess publications through Yoda.

Describe the solution you'd like

Alongside the existing roles (admin, data manager, member. viewer) add a "data librarian" role that can only assess publications. Once a dataset has been submitted for publication, 'data librarians' will be notified and can accept/reject the submission.

Describe alternatives you've considered

The alternative in our case is to prepare guidelines and policies for our data managers which we are working on right now. However, we would prefer to keep the rights to accept publications in hands of our data librarians.

Additional context

[peer35]

The downside is that at the publication stage the dataset is already fixed in the Vault. If the data librarian finds a problem in the dataset itself (for example privacy sensitive data in an open dataset), this is already to late.

On the other hand, we have talked about a one-step publish workflow before, this could fit into that.

[NikaVK]

Good point.

We were thinking a bit more about our feature request and how can we possibly fit it into the existing workflow but we keep coming in short. The way our University is organized is different - we have a network of data stewards (per chair group) who are at the moment in charge of the submissions to the Vault and consequently for the publication. This system turned out very fruitful. The pitfall now lies in the approval for publication step, which we would like to prevent.

In addition, we feel there should be flexibility in the Yoda system to allow other, different organizational structures too.

Indeed, once the dataset is accepted to the Vault it should be (in theory) also ready for publication. That is why we now suggest to implement a "2 step archiving process" or "2 step vault approval". We would like to introduce an additional role/privilege - " the archive manager" that would provide another check to the vault submittal request.

As we would like to harvest the knowledge of our data stewards (with data manager roles) they would be the first ones to do the gross check of the submittal to the Vault. After they approve, the request will go to the new role of he 'archiving manager'. In our case these would be our data librarians who would make sure the submittal to the Vault is also ready for publication. To sum up, the workflow with the new role/privilege would be as follows:

1. researcher submits their work to the Vault
2. datamanager gets notified and checks the work. 2.a. If not satisfied, rejects the submittal and contacts the researcher. 2.b. If satisfied, approves the submittal .
3. After the submittal has been approved by the data manager, the archive manager gets notified. 3.a.. If satisfied, the work is submitted to the Vault and ready for publication. 3.b. If not, data manager is notified, who then notifies the researcher. Or it can also go directly to the researcher.

If possible, we could make this feature Yoda instance dependent - if required the " 2 step vault approval" is activated. If not, nothing changes.