2.1.3 Mapping process - author and review workflow

Authoring is completed before review is started.

Once review is complete, an author can then pick up any rows that have been identified as problematic and then the author/reviewing cycle continues

This may be useful when time is not an issue. Doing it this way may make it easier to ensure consistency as reviewing can be completed when looking at the map as a whole (as well as individual map rows). As work is not done in parallel, this method can be more time consuming.

1. Authoring tasks are created
2. Once all rows in the source code set have been mapped and all authoring tasks completed, review tasks are created
3. Review tasks are completed
4. Where there are rejected map rows, new author tasks can be created containing those filtered rows and assigned to user(s) to author/update
5. New review tasks are created containing those newly mapped/updated rows and assigned to user(s) to review
6. Steps 4-5 repeated until all rows are approved

Note: Once an author task is completed, if rows have been rejected by a reviewer, then a new author task needs to be created.

While authoring is being completed, review is occurring simultaneously.

This may be useful when time efficiency is required as processes can occur in parallel. It may also be useful where you do not have dedicated team members who can only spend shorter periods of time working on map development. It may be more difficult to maintain consistency, so clear, updated documentation and communication on mapping rules between team members is important.

1. Authoring tasks are created
2. As authoring begins review can begin. Review tasks can be created assigned
   • At the beginning containing all rows - users can check their review tasks periodically and review rows belonging to the task that are in the appropriate state (MAPPED), returning back and checking again until complete; OR
   • as required, filtering map rows that are ready to be reviewed (in a MAPPED state) to create a review task. This can be done periodically until all reviews are complete.
3. As reviews are being completed and there are any REJECTED rows that
   • belong to an active author tasks, the assigned author can update as required
   • do not belong to an active author task (as it has been completed or cancelled), then these can be filtered and assigned to a user(s) to author/update
4. This process is continued until all rows are approved

 Mix of series and parallel workflows can be used. This can be a combination of completing authoring prior to review, and having some tasks open and close as resources such as specialised reviewers become available.

A hybrid approach would require close management by the map owner to ensure all work is completed.

This may be useful when you have a varying team with different resourcing availabilities. It may be more difficult to maintain consistency, so clear, updated documentation and communication on mapping rules between team members is important.