Hi @dijana,
Supporting the reviewer/editor double-role is a bit of a work in progress, but we’ve made a few steps towards clarifying it recently. See Section editors can access submission and data only if they are assigned to that submission · Issue #2109 · pkp/pkp-lib · GitHub for the gory details.
In short, this means clarifying the distinction between Section Editors and Journal Managers. Managers will always have access to all submissions, and Section Editors will always have access only to the submissions to which they’ve been assigned. (This assignment can take the form of automatic assignment, based on what sections they’re designated as Section Editors for.)
This is done primarily to support the case of Guest Editors, which is a situation we’ve had a moderate amount of feedback on. These users will generally behave as Reviewers, but will occasionally be asked to perform editorial roles on specific submissions.
Generally I’m not in favour of allowing people to view both the Reviewer interface and the editorial workflow for the same submission. If they’ve got permission to view the editorial workflow, then the reviewer workflow will present a confusingly feature-limited window on the submission. I think a better approach might be to bulk up the reviewing tools in the editorial workflow instead. If that’s even necessary, as OTOH managers/assigned section editors should be able to enter review responses using the editorial workflow already in OJS 3.0.1.
Regards,
Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team