just a long list on the side with the names of everyone who ever opened the file is not useful. We need to see the changes that were made in each version - true versions, not when someone just opens the file. This is not only useful to pin down who made a change and when but it leaves us vulnerable to legal challenges since we cannot tell when a change was made and by whom. I see that this has been on your request list for over a year. Hopefully we can expect to see this implemented soon?
| Categories | User Workflow, New Functionality, Other |
Tambien se sugiere que incluya todos los eventos en el historial, revisando no esta incluyendo los las Etiquetas de la historia y las palabras clave para SEO. Por favor incluirlas.
Yes, thanks Mike. I think, both information would be helpful. To underline the need: We have APIs changing stories all the time. So the argument, "last one editing is the last one responsible" doesn't really fit :).
Hey Caytlyn, I think the issue in this case was that the story in Killian's example was a scheduled publish by User A. Then User B edited it before the publish date/time. When it did publish, it made the "publish event user" as User B.
I understand Killian's point about it being confusing, but it is true that the Content Platform recorded user B as the "last updater" of the story that was published. I think the question (for Killian) is whether you'd expect:
A. The revision history to show an entry saying "scheduled publish by User A"... but still have the actual published revision show as User B
B. Something else :-)
Hey Caytlkyn, Clarice and I discussed this in an ACS-ticket: https://arcpublishing.atlassian.net/servicedesk/customer/portal/2/ACS-32213 - it's not possible to see who "pulled the trigger", but the last person or API editing the story. This leaves us with a lot of uncertainty.
Hi Killian! Could you explain further about not seeing who published a story? Here's a screenshot showing the email of who published a story in revision history. I want to make sure I'm understanding the gap accurately! Thanks.
Something I would consider really important is that the revision history now doesn't show who published a story. This is really important for several reasons, not at least legal ones.
Progress was made recently, - comparing one version to the currently live version is better - but I'm here to specifically request tags, circulations and authors be added to revision history.
ok - now we have had a case where we have to prove where a specific word was in a story and when it was taken out and there is no way to track back what text was in version 6 and what text is in version 7 of a story - which any logical person would expect a version history to show. Please move this from "future consideration" to planned in a forthcoming release. We beg you.