What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the journal three-stage review and three-proofreading and editorial quality scenario. Materials include three-stage review forms, proofs, proofreading records, as well as terminology glossaries and comparison drafts produced in the multilingual materials and terminology handling step. The three-stage review form carries the fields, dates, and signatures of the initial review, re-review, and final review; the proof carries editorial traces and version identifiers; the proofreading record carries the quantity, date, and receipt of each proofreading; the terminology glossary and comparison draft carry the unified wording of the same term throughout the whole text and the correspondence between the translated name and the original text it refers back to. The material sources are versions submitted by editorial, proofreading, and terminology management roles in different rounds, and the update rhythm rolls forward with the advancement of the three-stage review rounds and proof versions. When the materials enter the workflow, the three-stage review form, proof, and proofreading record serve as verification objects, while the terminology glossary and comparison draft serve as the finished-product targets to be orchestrated, and are further executed by subsequent nodes according to branches.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting branch directions and interaction state records. "Unify the terminology glossary and comparison draft" is then completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution according to branches. When the user selection node is triggered, the conversation enters the interaction state and records the workflow state; after the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the selected option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Three-stage review form | Whether the fields, dates, and signatures are complete, and whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent across the two materials | Check the initial review, re-review, and final review fields and signatures of the three-stage review form one by one, and compare the name, quantity, and date of the same record in the proof and proofreading record; check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, and confirm that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes |
| Proof | Whether the version is synchronized, and whether the editorial traces and version identifier correspond to the proofreading record | Check whether the proof version identifier is synchronized with the version in the proofreading record, and inspect cases of missing signatures or receipts; trigger an interaction state, view the node status in the run record, and confirm that the branch direction is consistent with the selected option |
| Proofreading record | Whether the quantity, date, and receipt match the three-stage review form and proof, and whether signatures are missing | Extract three terms and check whether their wording is consistent throughout the whole text, and at the same time compare the quantity, date, and receipt of the proofreading record with the three-stage review form and proof; reference variables in a subsequent node and run a trial once, confirming that the branch corresponding to nodeId is executed correctly |
| Terminology glossary and comparison draft | The same term is consistent throughout the whole text, and the translated name can refer back to the original text | After continuing execution according to branches, check the correspondence between the terminology glossary and the comparison draft item by item, confirming that the same term has consistent wording throughout the whole text and that the translated name can refer back to the original text |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the three-stage review form and the proofreading record. Cause: The two materials are updated separately and are not synchronized and checked within the same round.
- Symptom: The proof version and the proofreading record version are not synchronized, and editorial traces fall on the old version. Cause: When the version advances, the check is not run again according to branches.
- Symptom: The three-stage review form or proofreading record lacks signatures or receipts. Cause: After the interaction is completed, the process stops and subsequent nodes do not continue execution.
How to verify the setup
This feature acceptance: run trials option by option, check the branch direction and interaction state in the run record, confirm that each option corresponds to one branch, that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes, and that variables and nodeId can be traced back in the run record.
Business test: extract three terms and check whether their wording is consistent throughout the whole text, and at the same time check the fields, dates, and signatures of the three-stage review form, proof, and proofreading record, confirming that the name, quantity, and date of the same record match across the two materials.
- In the node, check the options and branch connections one by one, trigger an interaction state, view the node status in the run record, and confirm that the situation where a certain option is selected but the default branch is still taken does not occur.
- Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial once, confirming that the same session does not repeatedly enter the interaction and that the process continues downward after the interaction is completed.