DSpace
  1. DSpace
  2. DS-135

Withdrawn items displayed as "restricted" rather than withdrawn

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed Closed (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 1.5.0, 1.5.1, 1.5.2, 1.6.0, 1.6.1, 1.6.2, 1.7.0, 1.7.1, 1.7.2
    • Fix Version/s: 1.8.0
    • Component/s: XMLUI
    • Labels:
      None
    • Attachments:
      3
    • Comments:
      11

      Description

      If you withdraw an item via the XMLUI, and then visit the item page as a non-Admin, you are asked to login. After a valid login, the page displays: "You do not have the credentials to access the restricted item hdl:123456789/1". This is a misleading message as the item has actually been withdrawn and should be displayed as withdrawn.

      If you happen to access a withdrawn item as an Administrator, you are displayed the item as normal (with no indication that the item is withdrawn). This is also misleading as the Administrator may assume that the item was not withdrawn successfully.

      Rather than displaying such a "Restricted Item" message for withdrawn items, the following should probably happen:
      (1) User is displayed an "Item has been withdrawn" message
      (2) The page should return a 404, so that search engines are encouraged to remove the item from their indexes
      (3) If an Admin accesses a withdrawn item, he/she should see a message that clearly states that the item is withdrawn (likely at the top of the page), while also seeing the normal metadata/files for the withdrawn item.
      1. Clean_Tombstone_Via_Restricted_Item.patch
        23 kB
        Tim Donohue
      2. Tim-DS135.patch
        25 kB
        Tim Donohue
      1. tombstone-screen.jpg
        53 kB

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Tim Donohue added a comment -
          Mark,

          I'm slightly confused as to the usage of the new tombstone page (for others -- I've attached a screenshot above, see: tombstone-screen.jpg).

          A few things that seem a bit odd to me:

          1) First off, I noticed this screen throws a 200 OK. Likely this should be either a 404 or perhaps a 401 (unauthorized)?

          2) Perhaps more importantly, I'm not sure I understand the purpose of the email & comments field? It isn't self explanatory what that does (and the page itself doesn't tell you anything about why you'd want to enter your email & whether it's required or not). It looks like that field ends up sending an email to the "feedback recipient". But, unfortunately the sent email has no context information (it's impossible to tell which Item the user was visiting when they sent that email). So, I wonder what the purpose of having a feedback email on the Tombstone page provides? Do you have a specific use case here that you are attempting to meet?

          I also wonder in my mind whether we have a small usability issue here. I wonder why we even provide an option to login for Withdrawn items? It seems to imply that with your login you'd get access to the item. But, that's not the case (unless you are an Administrative user). Instead, you just go to a screen that says "This item is withdrawn".

          All that being said, I think this is a good step in the right direction. I mostly wonder about the usefulness of the Feedback email on that page (but we could always just remove that for now), and want to ensure we are responding with something other than 200 OK.

          I'd be curious to hear others feedback on this.
          Show
          Tim Donohue added a comment - Mark, I'm slightly confused as to the usage of the new tombstone page (for others -- I've attached a screenshot above, see: tombstone-screen.jpg). A few things that seem a bit odd to me: 1) First off, I noticed this screen throws a 200 OK. Likely this should be either a 404 or perhaps a 401 (unauthorized)? 2) Perhaps more importantly, I'm not sure I understand the purpose of the email & comments field? It isn't self explanatory what that does (and the page itself doesn't tell you anything about why you'd want to enter your email & whether it's required or not). It looks like that field ends up sending an email to the "feedback recipient". But, unfortunately the sent email has no context information (it's impossible to tell which Item the user was visiting when they sent that email). So, I wonder what the purpose of having a feedback email on the Tombstone page provides? Do you have a specific use case here that you are attempting to meet? I also wonder in my mind whether we have a small usability issue here. I wonder why we even provide an option to login for Withdrawn items? It seems to imply that with your login you'd get access to the item. But, that's not the case (unless you are an Administrative user). Instead, you just go to a screen that says "This item is withdrawn". All that being said, I think this is a good step in the right direction. I mostly wonder about the usefulness of the Feedback email on that page (but we could always just remove that for now), and want to ensure we are responding with something other than 200 OK. I'd be curious to hear others feedback on this.
          Hide
          Mark Diggory added a comment -
          1. Your right, that was supposed to be in the patch.

          2. Was to provide the user an opportunity to follow up,

          3. The login link is there to provide the user the opportunity to log in given they are unauthenticated. If they are an admin that means they may still have an opportunity to view the item, I'd recommend that we are open to community requirements in this area and with the other patches , this will probibly change I the future anyhow.

          For instance, we can as you say, put he login link only into the view in the restricted case.

          I'll add status codes and shift the login like later today.
          Show
          Mark Diggory added a comment - 1. Your right, that was supposed to be in the patch. 2. Was to provide the user an opportunity to follow up, 3. The login link is there to provide the user the opportunity to log in given they are unauthenticated. If they are an admin that means they may still have an opportunity to view the item, I'd recommend that we are open to community requirements in this area and with the other patches , this will probibly change I the future anyhow. For instance, we can as you say, put he login link only into the view in the restricted case. I'll add status codes and shift the login like later today.
          Hide
          Robin Taylor added a comment -
          For what its worth my vote would be for the simple option of a tombstone message and an appropriate status code. Anything else could/should wait until post 1.8. The added features, whilst appealing, are not sufficiently important to merit holding up the release.

          Cheers, Robin.
          Show
          Robin Taylor added a comment - For what its worth my vote would be for the simple option of a tombstone message and an appropriate status code. Anything else could/should wait until post 1.8. The added features, whilst appealing, are not sufficiently important to merit holding up the release. Cheers, Robin.
          Hide
          Tim Donohue added a comment -
          In the essence of time, I went ahead and generated a simplified version of Mark's patch (see Tim-DS135.patch above), removing a few features and performing minor cleanup.

          My version of the tombstone patch has the same implementation as Mark's, but I changed the following things:
          * Access Restricted / Withdrawn pages now return 404 status
          * Login link is only displayed if an item is access restricted (not displayed if withdrawn)
          * Added some more message keys to clean up usability (make it more obvious when something is withdrawn or when you are logged in but still don't have access to a restricted item)
          * Removed the Feedback Form from the tombstone page (it wasn't working properly & I'm not sure everyone agrees it should be there -- we can always reanalyze after 1.8)
          * Fixed a few minor bugs (e.g. the link to the login page was wrong)

          Again, in the essence of time (since 1.8.0 final is pending), I'm going to commit this simplified patch immediately to Trunk for feedback & further testing. We can always roll it back if we notice any issues.
          Show
          Tim Donohue added a comment - In the essence of time, I went ahead and generated a simplified version of Mark's patch (see Tim-DS135.patch above), removing a few features and performing minor cleanup. My version of the tombstone patch has the same implementation as Mark's, but I changed the following things: * Access Restricted / Withdrawn pages now return 404 status * Login link is only displayed if an item is access restricted (not displayed if withdrawn) * Added some more message keys to clean up usability (make it more obvious when something is withdrawn or when you are logged in but still don't have access to a restricted item) * Removed the Feedback Form from the tombstone page (it wasn't working properly & I'm not sure everyone agrees it should be there -- we can always reanalyze after 1.8) * Fixed a few minor bugs (e.g. the link to the login page was wrong) Again, in the essence of time (since 1.8.0 final is pending), I'm going to commit this simplified patch immediately to Trunk for feedback & further testing. We can always roll it back if we notice any issues.
          Hide
          Tim Donohue added a comment -
          I've committed my simplified patch (Tim-DS135.patch) to Trunk (r6812) for verification & testing by others. Once we are all satisfied, then we can close this issue.
          Show
          Tim Donohue added a comment - I've committed my simplified patch (Tim-DS135.patch) to Trunk (r6812) for verification & testing by others. Once we are all satisfied, then we can close this issue.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Robin Taylor
              Reporter:
              Tim Donohue
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              0 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: