Content intake

An operator opens a content item for a specific project and organization. The item number and title identify the record the team will review; the assigned owner is responsible for preparing it. Start it as Draft, then use the Content Items and Details workspace to keep its status and revision visible alongside the work. A title alone is a poor handoff. The project tells the reviewer which collection definition applies, and the organization establishes the operational scope.

A typical case is a digitized thesis assigned to a repository project. The operator records its number, title, submitting date and owner, then begins the requirement lines and evidence files. The reviewer can open the selected item from the board and inspect its current revision without searching across separate lists. If a later correction is needed, the original item remains the point of reference.

• One item per submission. The item connects its project, organization, owner and supporting work.
• Visible revision. A decision belongs to the revision it reviewed, so an amended item cannot silently inherit an earlier approval.
• Recorded status. Draft, Submitted, Verified, Decided and Delivered give the team an agreed reading of progress.

Decide how item numbers are assigned and how a submission is matched to a project. Agree which organization owns each project and which operator may prepare its items. Establish when a title or source reference is sufficient to create the draft, and when the operator should wait for the underlying document. Map existing repository identifiers before importing open work so the same item is not opened under several numbers.

Agree who checks that an item is ready to submit. A draft can be useful while evidence is being gathered; submission is the handoff to independent review. The selected project’s policy reference gives the reviewer context for that decision. Prepare a case with incomplete evidence as well as a complete case, so the distinction is clear to the team.

The operator creates a thesis item under an active project and assigns an owner. A supporting file arrives later. The operator attaches it and completes the associated requirement line, then submits the revision. The reviewer opens the submitted item, confirms the title and project, and checks that the requirement and file refer to the same source. If a correction changes the material, the revised item needs its own review decision. The history should show the path without erasing the earlier work.

• Content intake board — Items grouped by their working status, with owner, project and revision visible.
• My content items — The operator’s assigned records for preparation and follow-up.
• Submitted revisions — Items ready for the reviewer to inspect.

Content intake to decision follows the submission and review handoff. Correction and supersession covers a changed revision.