Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Versioning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff press for clear H/R versioning and an 'assigned to' column in drafting UI
Summary
Attendees flagged confusion combining authors' H-versions and typists' R-versions into a single request history; they asked developers to display "assigned to" and preserve H- and R-version distinctions to make accountability and change tracking easier.
During the demo, developers showed a combined request view that lists drafts under one request number. Multiple staff raised concerns that mixing H- (author) and R- (room/typist) drafts could make it hard to know who made which changes and when. Presenter (S4) suggested adding a column that displays the user who currently "owns" a draft; S6 and others said that would replicate existing handoff tracking and help find errors.
One participant described the current practice and the practical need for distinct version records: "Ronnie's H will always be that. His H version will always be even if he's got different, like, versions of it where he's changed stuff, he'll have different points," said Presenter (S5) during the conversation about version numbering. Staff also emphasized sequential numbering clarity: H-point versions (1.1, 1.2) should be visually distinct from R versions to avoid confusion when a draft enters the typist's workflow. Developers demonstrated releasing an H-version as the introduced draft and said the UI could show which draft was introduced, but staff cautioned that a release does not guarantee that the released draft is the final introduced version if the member later requests changes.
The attendees concluded with a follow-up plan: testability and permissioning for the "assigned to" column and version-creation workflow will be a priority in the next editor-focused session with the main developer.
