Status Feature passport: In progress (scoping/design sections done)
Analysis
Current state & context
Current state; current abilities & disabilities
Currently users can create reglementaire bijlages. However these can change over time.
Currently there is the ability to
Reglementaire bijlage editor / registery (currently only used by ABB with the templates)
Update existing text of an existing reglementaire bijlage
Add new text to an existing reglementaire bijlage
Current version available for users & compare to the one you're currently working on
In GN (for users)
View to maintain your reglementaire bijlages
Create reglementaire bijlages from template
Edit an existing regulatory statement
When you save, creates a new version
Besluiten
Insert a full, updated (version 2) reglementaire bijlage in a besluit
Currently there is not an ability to;
Reglementaire bijlage editor in the registry for ABB & users
See prior versions of the reglementaire bijlage
Revert back to a prior version & save it
See who made changes & when
Reglementaire bijlage editor for users
Create your own regulatory statement (not from a template)
Decisions + publication
Adding a regulatory statement to a decision (still needs to be build)
Only add the new updates to an existing reglementaire bijlage in a besluit (this could be (1) text that is newly added - for instance new articles- AND/OR (2) updates to existing text - for instance articles where something has been changed in AND/OR (3) removal of existing text- for instance the deletion of articles)
Abilities for agendapunten
🕵️♂️ Use Cases
As a user, I want to be able to update an existing RB
I want to be able to add new text/articles
I want to be able to delete text/articles
I want to be able to update text/articles (exchange text with other text)
As a user I want to be able to link a new version to a new decision
As a user, I want to be able to have the correct regulatory statement linked in my decision, even if the regulatory statement was changed after I created the agenda point
Usecase; a regulatory statement might have been changed after it was already added in GN to a decision. What version should be added?
🗜️ Constraints
Legal constraints
Technical constraints
🔬 Scope proposal
3 components
Editing/saving an existing RB for cities (not ABB-users for templates)
Seeing version history
Creating a decision of the new updates/RB
In scope
Changing an existing RS (aggregation + updating) for users (cities)
Creating a new version and store when this was created. (in the back-end a new URI needs to be created).
New regulatory statement version needs to be able to follow the existing flow again (be put on a new agenda/published)
Decision
Add new version of an existing regulatory statement to a new decision
(1-1 relationship between each new version of 1 RB and a new decision.)
Add new version of the RB in full to decision
Seeing a change history in reglementaire bijlage editor
when the regulatory statement was changed
What the prior version(s) were (only the version at that time, not the changes compared to now)
Out of scope
Decisions
Ability to only add the updates to a decision and not the full new version
Deciding/implementing whether long/short reglementaire bijlages should be added as a link in a besluit/publication
Editing
Edgecase - Editing a prior version (because that would overwrite the most recent version)
--> if we implement this, we should do it in parallel with reverting to an older version
Change history
storing who created it & what changes made --> Decision made during kcik-off meeting to treat this out of scope what changes are made, treat this separately
Side by side comparisons of new/old versions
Reverting to an older version (undoing recent changes)
Other products/features
Register & versioning for ABB-users (templates)
Versioning of agenda points
From the feasability meeting:
Usecase van verwijderen van draft versies
Verzamelen requirements voor publicatie plan —> voor reglementen (moet het apart beschikbaar zijn? Waar plaatsen we het? Plaatsen we aanpasseingen inline of in een nieuwe versie>)
In reglement een link naar besluit waarin het geaggendeed is
Status van reglementen klopt niet (geagendeerd / in voorbereiding)
Tracking op artikel niveau —> dit hoort samen met publiceren
Gelijktrekken van versioning met agenda punten
🕑 Potential future versions/iterations
Showing side by side comparisons of new/old version
Send an alert to prior authors when an existing RB is changed
Only sending changed articles to publication (article tracking)
Delete draft versions
🤔 Questions/Discussion points
Kick-off meeting Q'
Scope
Do we want to tackle all 3 components? Or should we cut them in pieces? - All 3
Was there user research done on this part of RB? No
What do secretariaten do most of the time? Linking to a full, updated regulatory statement?
What are the most common usecases for reglementen? Adding new ones? Updating old onse? Or do they then duplicate an old one and just create a new version?
Editing RS
Component in the editor to jump to a preview --> Edit button
Should prior versions be editable or only the most recent ones? If an older version should be editable, what happens with the most recent one if it's saved?
When I edit a RS and it's added to an agenda point, then the RS is updated, which ones need to be appended to the agenda point --> proposal: needs to be the latest / Can we lock the regulatory statement? Not realistic!Can we add a functionality to the agenda that updates to the latest version
Reglementaire bijlage editor
What rights do people need to edit a reglementaire bijlage? Is this already existing?
Can anyone see who updated a regulatory statement? Are their privacy concerns?
Should the old version still be visible or only who/when it was updated?
What are the legal grounds for linking an updated RB to a besluit? Full updated reglementaire bijlage OR only the updates?
Feasibility meeting
Vragen/comments
Ik maak een besluit, wil daar een restributiereglement aan toevoegen —> status nodig “toegewezen aan besluit”
Als je koppelt aan besluit, is er een link naar besluit waarin het gelinkt is?
Als je een nieuwe versie na een gepubliceerde wil creeeren
Beslissing; we tracken geen artikel niveau yet
Gelijktrekking van agenda punten UI —> versies in zelfde scherm is beter
Hangen attachemetns aan versies? Zou moet en zo zijn, maar is niet zo
Reglement in besluit, hoe weet je welkeentje dat is?
Altijd de laatste
Reasd only view eens het gepubliceerd is —> design missing —> zelfde zonder knoppen
Link gaat naar beslissing (niet UIT het platform, niet naar de publicatie)
Usecase; kan je versies verwijderen?
Technische feasability;
Herstellen —> nieuwe versie maken content hersteld naar actuele versie je gaat niet ECHT terug naar de historische versie.
To do
[x] Creeer extra status “toegewezen aan besluit” of “geagendeerd”
[x] Creeer extra design van agendapunt dat gepubliceerd is —> geen knoppen maar link naar gepubliceerde bersie
[x] Creeer extra design van agendapunt met reglement invoegen waarbij er ook een timestamp bijstaat wanneer laatste aanpasssing geweest is
Out of scope
[ ] In versie reglement een link naar besluit waarin het geaggendeed is
[ ] Status van reglementen klopt niet (geagendeerd / in voorbereiding)
[ ] Tracking op artikel niveau —> dit hoort samen met
[ ] Gelijktrekken van versioning met agenda punten
[ ] Usecase van verwijderen van draft versies
[ ] Verzamelen requirements + publicatie plan —> voor reglementen (moet het apart beschikbaar zijn? Waar plaatsen we het?)
[ ] Inline of volledige document
Solution
Design
Principles
Editing/updating regulatory statements lives in Regulatory Statements sections / Editor
In Agenda points it's always the last "actual version"
When a regulatory statement is published in a decision, that version cannot be changed anymore.
We do not work with a draft status as the "actual version" is a draft as well, until it's published, after which it's locked.
Question feasibility meeting
Can we lock a regulatory statement to not be editable by anyone except for the author (usecase: author 1 creates a regulatory statement & links to agenda item. Author 2 adds things. Later author 1 goes back to agenda point; OR they need to know it was changed OR author 2 shouldn't be able to adapt a regulatory statement)
Flow
Vocabulary
Actual version: this is the most recent version and will be used when a statement is linked to a decision. Each time you save the actual version gets updated.
History: list of previous versions. Each time a new version is saved the old version is created as an entry in the history, tagged with date and time.
Published tag: when a decision with a linked statement is published. A tag is added to the actual version and it is locked. If you create a new version after that the tag will remain on the published version in the history.
Non-editable: an actual version becomes non-editable (locked) when it is published. A version in the history is always non editable
Saving/recover behaviour
Saving is a manual operation, there is no autosave:
Save: when you save the actual version a the previous actual version is added in the history
Recover: the state of a version in the history can be recovered. After recovering a version it becomes the actual version and the previous actual version is added in the history.
Navigating when you have unsaved changes: when you change routes (back to overview, navigate to a version,...) you get a modal window to alert you that you have unsaved changes. There you have two option: cancel or save.
Mockups
Technical
Back-end: Changes need to be tracked to article level (versioning of articles)
Other info
Ideas
Potential solutions (from kick-off meeting)
Locking things when agenda points/decisions/regulatory statements are being edited
Linking to a specific version & how to treat it if it's linked --> publishing + warning?
Including a full version in the publication flow --> we need to have a discussion on publishing just the updates (out of scope for now)
Article needs to have a URI as well --> changes need to be tracked on an Article level
