Under Community Review

Output format should be on Add publication output window

"Output format" window should be combined with "Add publication output" window to make the system a bit leaner and the creation faster.

Screenshot showing 'Select Output Format' window on the left with options like CHM, PDF, PDF Review, and Zip. An arrow points from 'Output format' dropdown to 'Output format' field in 'Add Publication Output' window on the right.

Beate Schuengel

  • As said: "options in the second step might be different" and examples from my demo environment are:

    - Some output formats do support one language only, therefore the language field is a single value dropdown list but other formats do support multilingual, therefore the language field is a multi value field

    - Publications into web delivery platforms might allow to select the URL of the delivery server, e.g. to select a staging/test server or the production server

    - With our Dynamic Delivery platform, the remote status (online or offline) is an option that only shows up with that output format

    In the ootb configuration, the second window does not allow to change the output format. So that seems to be adopted to the fact that your output formats all have the same set of metadata with your configuration already. But we have to keep the standard system universal and to be able to support different sets of metadata for different output formats, I am afraid we have to stick to the two step approach. 

  • in reply to Jörg Schmidt

    We are not able to see any difference within the different selected output formats metadates. All windows and available fields are the same over all selected outputs. Our system provider SXP (Endan Mulyamardini) also agreed on that point, that there is no difference as you mentioned before. So please tell us more detailed about the differences you suggest. 

    So far as we know, espacially since the output format also can be changed in the second window and there is no known difference between the selected outputs we recommend to slim the creation process down, started with the omission of the first window. Please reply on our request and question. Thanks in advance.

  • I am afraid that will be tricky: Based on the selection in the first step, the available options in the second step might be different (e.g. multiple languages might not be supported will all Output formats or additional attributes might be required for web delivery). So as a generic solution, supporting all kinds of output, I see a two step interface as the only option.

    BR,

    Jörg Schmidt