CCL Custom Role Setting: Restrict editing permissions to metadata within content library records

Currently, when a user has permission to edit a QA pair or document, they are also able to make changes to both:

-Question & Answer Fields

-Metadata (add/remove tags, custom field values, collections, owners, etc..)

State Street would like to restrict a user's ability to modify CCL records' metadata via custom role, so that the user can only make changes to Question & Answer fields.

Find more posts tagged with

Will not implement

Status: Will not implement

Comments

sathish s

@Sasha Spektor

Thank you for creating S4, but if the user is allowed to edit the question, alternate question and response in Q&A pair but not other information like custom field, metadata and privacy and settings how will they make edits to review cycle and complete review?

Sasha Spektor

@sathish s they would not make any edits to the review cycle. In this case, they would only make edits to the content (question, alternate question and response in Q&A pair). Once they update the content, they would complete their review.

sathish s

@Sasha Spektor This is a niche use case. I also think this will heavily impact if the same user is assigned as owner because right now if a user is owner of a content then the respective user will have full edit access to the content including question, alternate question, response and other fields such as privacy, metadata, custom fields, attachments. We may not be able to support this if the user has to be assigned as a owner. CC @Natalie_Berigan

Sasha Spektor

@sathish s @Natalie_Berigan I understand. I'll provide a bit more context, as I believe this could be a bit more of a common requirement than we may currently realize. State Street's content management process has clear stakeholders & custom role requirements:

-SME Responsibility: Update / Review QA Pair Question & Answer

-Content Manager Responsibility: Final reviewers in sequential review & content moderators. They oversee Content Library Organization / Taxonomy (metadata: tags, custom fields, collections, owners, etc..)

Content Managers add SME's as owners during on demand review cycles - SME's only have edit "access assigned" permissions via custom role.

They perceive it to be a risk if the SME is able to update metadata during the review cycle. They have hundreds of SME's who are not familiar to content organization / management. The main risk being human error occurring and (for example) a tag being removed or added unnecessarily.

There is currently no safeguard in place for removed metadata as they have metadata synchronization enabled and rely on this capability for other steps in the content review process.

Potential Workarounds if current S4 in not feasible: Can we configure "Metadata Synchronization" to be a role-based permission? For example, only 'Content Managers' can use metadata synchronization during a review cycle? Or - perhaps we can have optional configuration for Moderation Settings: metadata updates send through moderation (enable or disable)

Trying to think outside of the box here - let me know if a huddle would be helpful. Thank you, both!!!