Review request in OJS 3.0. Reviewer doesn’t see the submission file although:

the check box “Reviewers will have access to the submission file only after agreeing to review it” is unchecked.

After clicking submission URL that he/she has got by email, the reviewer is landing in the Request part of the Reviewing stage. And there is no file to be seen there: only Article Title and Article Abstract.
The reviewer has to accept to make a review, to be able to download the submission file i.e. to go to Step #3.

Am I right?

@asmecher, could you tell me: If before deciding to accept or refuse making the review the reviewer wanted to read the manuscript, how could he download the file?

As I wrote above, in the Settings: the check box “Reviewers will have access to the submission file only after agreeing to review it” is unchecked.

Thank you, Anna

Hi all,

This has been filed in Github issue tracking – watch that entry for further activity.

Regards,
Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team

Are there any plans for closing this milestone in version 3.1 eventually?

It is essential for our journal, which is moving to OJS, to provide reviewers with possibility to view the whole article before deciding to accept or decline the review.

Hi @mjanjic75,

It’s currently scheduled against OJS 3.1, and the issue page linked above is the best way to stay up to date on progress.

Regards,
Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team

Thank You very much for the answer.

Regards,
Mladen Janjić
University of Kragujevac
Faculty of Technical Sciences Čačak
Serbia

P.S. I hope that in the future OJS will be based on modules which can be arranged without need to change the code, like in some CMS - for instance, one journal (Kragujevac journal of Mathematics) made some major changes to the OJS so that authors can choose section editors (sections are fields, like analysis, algebra, etc. in Mathematics) upon submission, which is similar to Editor choosing section editors.
If choosing a section editor would be a module, Administrator could put it anywhere where needed, depending on the journal, so developers would be free of providing such features upon requests.

Hi @mjanjic75,

We depend on user feedback, including this forum, to determine our priorities. Because we’re a generalist tool – not specific to any scientific domain – it’s difficult to strike a balance between meeting user needs fully and keeping the software trim and usable. OJS 2.x accomplished some of this via plugins, and we’re hoping to expand this further in OJS 3.x. That said, we’re also hoping that the community can step up to code and exchange the parts of the ecosystem that we aren’t able to tackle. We’re always open to contributions and can facilitate turning one-off modifications into plugins and/or core code modifications.

Regards,
Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team