Hi in which future version of OJS will custom form plugins features eventually end up on OJS?
Can you describe in more detail what a custom form plugin would do?
Hi Check the following links:
We don’t have any plans to implement what you describe at this time.
Thanks for the reply. But why?!
For several reasons It is recommended to implement them in OJS:
- It helps the researchers to find more affiliations to OJS.
- It helps the researchers to feel more attached to the journals.
- It helps the researchers to have more autonomy in their activities.
Look how old are the decision makers? It looks they are not old enough to understand the nuances of such affiliations, attachments and the autonomy.
As a small team building a large and complex application, we have to draw careful limits around what we will develop and maintain. We already struggle to invest in and maintain core platform features around submission, editorial review, publishing and distribution.
There are lots of alternative software and services available to gather information and surveys, and these are purpose-built for this activity. In OJS, you can export your users in order to take advantage of these alternatives and we are working on making it easier to do this.
If these alternatives are not sufficient, the platform also makes it possible for community members to build, release and maintain plugins to do these things. But so far we have not really had requests to turn the platform into a general research tool. If this were to become a major request that we hear from our community, we might reconsider it. But we don’t have much demand for this right now. And so we’re unlikely to take the work on ourselves (though we encourage our community to build plugins to serve their own needs).
You can see some of the work we are investing in, and which we have scheduled to undertake over the next few major releases, by looking at our roadmap.
Thanks for the reply. With respect it is great to draw careful limits around what you will develop and maintain. The feature i recommended is an essential feature for submission, editorial review, publishing and distribution. When the Forms features are missing we -the users- are obliged to use alternative software which are not connected to the current features of the OJS. Inter-related affiliations, attachments and the autonomy can not be satisfied with alternative software. For example for a feedback collection form We are always obliged to use alternative software which is a terrible trouble. exporting users in order to take advantage of these alternatives is not a safe, logical, substitute or option. I believe you (OJS team) are the most reliable members to release and maintain plugins to do these things not other community members. If you have no requests to turn the platform into a general research tool, is because the users (including me) little by little have believed that OJS is not a suitable platform for creating creativity. IT is YOUR TEAM who make us feel that it is a major request. If you do not feel it, the Reflection (public major request) will not be activated. You don’t have much demand for this right now, part because you have not collected suggestions, requests and specifically feedbacks from the users. The community plugins are not reliable substitute for internal REAL Plugins. I hope Wok no. 114 will be Dynamic forms Plugins on the roadmap.
One of the goals of this forum is to give our community an opportunity to make us aware of their priorities. We take comments in this forum and integrate it with the feedback we receive from focus groups, user testing sessions, partner relationships, and funding requirements. This thread is a great start and will provide a space for others to voice their own need for something like this.
On forms, I don’t know if I am missing a feature, but it would be nice to make more of the fields for adding an author to a paper compulsory – my journal has co-publishing arrangements with an aggregator that requires ORCiDs, for example, and every time a paper is accepted, I have to ask for these.
Since an author can sign up as a reader or reviewer and subsequently change status to author, I am not sure if this can easily be implemented though.
Possibly it would be best if moving the paper from review to copyediting could trigger a request for authors to correct their metadata; the simplest way to do this would be to add this request to the notification email template. So there are workarounds.
Hi @philipmach, one of our goals as we move to our schema architecture is to make the underlying data model more flexible, so that plugins can more easily specify requirements like this.
I do suspect, as you mentioned, that submission will be the wrong place to ask for this though. We don’t have an automated trigger yet, but it is possible to permit the author to edit metadata and send them a request (via a discussion) to check the metadata and update it.
It is also possible to write a small plugin that would not permit you to prevent publication of something without an ORCID. We have this filed as a feature request for the Orcid Plugin and I think we will see that before too long.