Rosetta

Your feedback matters to us. Help us improve Rosetta by telling us what you’d like to see using the message areas below. You can also can support something already posted.

We would love to be able to respond to every idea that is submitted, but this is not feasible. We are, however, committed to responding to the most popular ideas—those that have received the most points.

For more information please review our FAQ and guidelines. Thank you.

How can we improve Rosetta?

You've used all your votes and won't be able to post a new idea, but you can still search and comment on existing ideas.

There are two ways to get more votes:

  • When an admin closes an idea you've voted on, you'll get your votes back from that idea.
  • You can remove your votes from an open idea you support.
  • To see ideas you have already voted on, select the "My feedback" filter and select "My open ideas".
(thinking…)

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

If a similar idea already exists, you can support and comment on it.

If it doesn't exist, you can post your idea so others can support it.

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback
  1. Producer Mandatory Fields shall be controlled by a code table

    As of now (version 5.3) there is no code table to control which fields are optional or mandatory when adding a producer.

    We provide Rosetta as a service and the details (name, email, telephone etc.) of producers can be seen across the installation. This means that staff user 1 from institution A can see the details of the producers of all the other institutions. The workaround is to enter 123 as telephone.

    Basically we would like Rosetta to be fully compliant with the concept of multi-tenancy.
    Until this can be reached we would like to see code tables in use…

    3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    • view only- user who cannot break anything

      For error-detection and workflow documentation it is sometimes necessary to be able to view all configurations in Rosetta - even all in the Administration area.
      But not all users should be able to edit configuration elements in Rosetta, especially not in the Administration Area.
      In our (ZBW/Germany) opinion, a view-only-user would be very handy. This person would be able to see all the configuration details and the view-option would be available to her/him, but not the edit-button.
      She/he would not be able to break anything, but would be able to see all the details needed for documentation or other purposes. …

      3 votes
      Vote
      Sign in
      Check!
      (thinking…)
      Reset
      or sign in with
      • facebook
      • google
        Password icon
        Signed in as (Sign out)
        You have left! (?) (thinking…)
      • Read-only user

        As we've begun bringing more users into Rosetta we've seen the need for a different type of user, who could basically do these things:
        *view/download IEs/files
        *view the collection tree

        But should not be able to:
        *see/modify processes.
        *delete IEs or purge the recycle bin

        We checked using dummy accounts with 'Viewer/Editor - View' and 'Approver/Assessor/Arranger - View' but neither of these can see the collection tree, either from the data management menu or from the search screen. So, we'd like something similar Viewer-Editor-View but with access to the collection tree.

        6 votes
        Vote
        Sign in
        Check!
        (thinking…)
        Reset
        or sign in with
        • facebook
        • google
          Password icon
          Signed in as (Sign out)
          You have left! (?) (thinking…)
        • Don't see your idea?

        Feedback and Knowledge Base