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.
10 results found
-
I appreciate Rosetta's commitment to user feedback!
I totally agree with the importance of community input! It reminds me of my experience on the @Basketball Stars platform, where player feedback led to some amazing updates. Engaging with others and sharing our thoughts can truly shape the gaming experience. I encourage everyone to join the conversation and explore new ideas together. It's exciting to see how collaborative efforts can lead to significant improvements!
What Makes This Game Special
Basketball Stars captures the essence of street basketball in a simplified yet addictive format. Unlike complex sports simulations that require hours to learn, this game gets you playing within…1 vote -
Idea: Add Gamification to Improve Engagement
One way to make Rosetta more engaging is by adding gamification features. For example, users could earn badges for completing frequent tasks, track their progress with visual milestones, or unlock small rewards when reaching specific usage goals. These elements can help turn repetitive workflows into something more motivating and enjoyable.
A good reference is the arcade Tunnel Rush Game. The game keeps players hooked with clear challenges, instant feedback, and a constant sense of progression. Applying similar design principles in Rosetta could encourage users to stay more active, explore more features, and achieve better results.
1 vote -
Poki
Your open call for feedback shows a strong commitment to community-driven improvement—just like Poki, which empowers users to shape and streamline their own digital spaces.
1 vote -
space waves
I'm thrilled to introduce myself as a passionate game programmer with a special fondness for crafting immersive and captivating gaming experiences. My latest creation, https://space-waves.co, is a testament to this passion.
1 vote -
Easy Grade Calculator
As a student juggling multiple subjects, it used to be really stressful trying to keep track of where I stand in each class. I’d always be second-guessing how much I needed on the next exam just to pass — or to boost my grade.
Recently, I started using http://easygradescalculator.com/, and it’s made things way easier. It helps me calculate my grades instantly, see how I’m doing overall, and even tells me what score I need on upcoming assignments or finals.
If anyone here is also in school or college and wants to stay on top of their academic performance,…
1 vote -
Expand the search scope of the search box on web collection page
Is it possible to expand the search scope of the search box on web collection page from the current collection to all its sub-collections and itself?
For example, I tried to search IE2119194 by its partial title "South Korea's economic puzzle" on the following page;
but no matching IEs were found, because the IE belongs to the collection(id=109127824)'s sub-sub-sub collection(138846884).
- 109127824 > 138830885 > 138834664 > 138846884
3 votes -
Assigning a valid SSO user to a default account if one does not exist
We do not wish to have all of our institutional users in Rosetta, leaving that for administrators and publishers.
When a user has signed in successfully through SSO (in our case ADFS) we know that they are from our institution, so we should be able to do access rights rules based on this.
We are also able to pass through extra parameters through SAML to identify the type of user, and where they have come from, it would be great to be able to assign such users to basic user accounts so we can have granular access rights to IE's…
4 votes -
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…5 votes -
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.…24 votes -
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 treeBut should not be able to:
*see/modify processes.
*delete IEs or purge the recycle binWe 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.
10 votes
- Don't see your idea?