File revisions

A content item may have successive uploaded files as the team edits an image, video or document. Each file revision has its own version label, attachment, upload date and link to the parent content item. The approving person is recorded on that revision. This makes the review about a particular file, not about a vague assertion that the content is ready.

The version approval workflow takes the submitted file, resolves its linked item and checks rights coverage before marking the reviewed version approved on the parent. The Editor can then publish the approved item. When an item is changed after approval, the team needs to know which upload received the approval and whether the replacement needs another review.

• Upload. The Producer attaches a file revision to the correct item and gives it a useful version label.
• Review. The Rights Manager checks the linked item and rights context before approving the submitted revision.
• Release. The Editor confirms that the approved file is the one intended for publication.

Choose a version naming convention that people can apply consistently. Decide whether a corrected export gets a new version even when its title is unchanged. The attachment and upload time help distinguish files, but the label is what a colleague will use in a discussion. Agree who may be named as the approving person and how to handle a reviewer who is unavailable.

A file revision is linked to a content item, so the team should decide when material belongs to an existing item and when a new item is needed. Different rights terms, project owners or publication dates may warrant separate items. This choice affects the rights check as well as the release history.

A Producer uploads the first image export to a draft item. The Editor asks for a color correction, and the Producer uploads a second revision with a new version label. The second file is submitted for approval. The Rights Manager checks the agreement attached to the parent item before recording the approval. The Editor opens the file list and checks that the reviewed revision is the corrected export linked to the approved item.

If the Producer uploads another correction after the approval, it should remain a distinct revision. The Editor should not infer that approval of the earlier file covers the new upload. Rehearse this situation during setup: the team should be able to point to the reviewed file, its parent item, the approving person and the rights record considered at that moment.

The file list also helps when an older export is requested. A reviewer can identify it by its version and upload date while retaining the connection to the item that carried the final publication. Keep file names and version labels readable enough for this comparison; an unexplained sequence of attachments makes approval harder to audit in daily work.

• Content Files List — Open revisions with their linked item, upload date and approving person.
• Content Items List — Check the state of the parent item before release.

See content review for the file decision and publication for release.