Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Problem: User permissions based on language are too restrictive #1823

Open
ravengermain opened this issue Jun 7, 2024 · 1 comment
Open
Labels
Type: enhancement An improvement to existing functionality.

Comments

@ravengermain
Copy link

ravengermain commented Jun 7, 2024

Current Behavior

One of AtoM's default behaviours is that users (unless they are Administrators) cannot link or update digital objects if the source language of the description they are trying to update is different than the language they have set using the "Globe" icon. This is because it would require translations. The code for this can be found here.

For example, if a Contributor has their language set to English, and they are trying to upload a digital object for a description that's in English, they will see the "More" button in the UI that they can expand to upload a digital object. However, if they change AtoM's language to French, the "More" button disappears.

Expected Behavior

This behaviour is too restrictive, especially for bilingual institutions.

Desired behaviour

  1. If you're a Contributor (or any user with permissions to upload digital objects), you should be able to do anything that a Contributor can do regardless of the language you have set.

Version used

AtoM 2.8.0

@ravengermain ravengermain added Type: bug A flaw in the code that causes the software to produce an incorrect or unexpected result. Type: enhancement An improvement to existing functionality. and removed Type: bug A flaw in the code that causes the software to produce an incorrect or unexpected result. labels Jun 7, 2024
@ravengermain ravengermain changed the title Problem: Problem: User permissions based on language are too restrictive Jun 7, 2024
@melaniekung
Copy link
Contributor

it should also be investigated what other feature/functionality this (code) decision affects. if required, a discussion should be had to decide if these other features/functionalities should be allowed as well.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Type: enhancement An improvement to existing functionality.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants