What this category's data looks like
In the journal three-review three-proof and editorial quality scenario, the materials entering the workflow include the three-review form, the proof, and the proofreading records. The three-review form carries the fields, dates, and signatures of the initial review, re-review, and final review; the proof carries the body text and layout status; the proofreading records carry the discrepancies found in each round of proofreading and the receipts. The three types of materials usually enter in batches by review round and proof round, and the same manuscript forms multiple versions across different rounds, with the update rhythm synchronized with the editing and processing progress. After the materials enter this feature, the three-review form serves as the main line of judgment, the proof serves as the base for comparison, and the proofreading records serve as the source of discrepancies; together the three support consistency verification of names, quantities, dates, and signatures, and locate field discrepancies of the same record between two materials.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting the branch direction and the interaction status records. The "discrepancy list" is completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution along the branch. When a node is triggered, the conversation enters the interaction state and records the workflow status; after the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the chosen option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Three-review form | Whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent between the three-review form and the proof, and whether signatures and receipts are complete | Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, compare the name, quantity, and date fields of the three-review form and the proof, and mark items missing signatures or missing receipts |
| Proof | Whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent between the proof and the proofreading records, and whether the versions are synchronized | Trigger a user selection node once, check the node status in the run records, and compare the fields and version markers of the proof and the proofreading records item by item |
| Proofreading records | Whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent between the proofreading records and the three-review form, and whether receipts are complete | Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial once, and verify the name, quantity, and date as well as the receipt status of the proofreading records and the three-review form |
| Workflow node | Whether each option corresponds to one branch, and whether the selection result is passed to subsequent nodes | Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, reference variables in a subsequent node and run a trial, and confirm the branch direction and the interaction status records corresponding to nodeId |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the three-review form and the proof, and conflicting items appear in the discrepancy list. Cause: the versions of the two materials are not synchronized, and the field update rhythms are inconsistent.
- Symptom: the proofreading records lack signatures or receipts, and the discrepancy list cannot determine the responsible stage. Cause: receipts did not enter the materials in sync with the proof round, and the signature fields were left blank.
- Symptom: after selecting an option, the default branch is still taken, and the process stops after the interaction completes. Cause: the options and branch connections were not checked one by one, and the interaction status did not continue execution according to the selection result.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: run a trial for each option one by one, check the branch direction and interaction status in the run records, confirm that each option corresponds to one branch, that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes, and that variables and nodeId are queryable in the run records.
Business test: use one real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, compare the name, quantity, date, and signatures in the three-review form, the proof, and the proofreading records, form a discrepancy list, hand it to the reviewer for confirmation, and write it back.
- Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, confirm that each option corresponds to one branch, and record
nodeIdand the interaction status. - Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial once, compare the name, quantity, date, and signatures of the three-review form, the proof, and the proofreading records, and output the discrepancy list.