Revision settings

(Issue based on feedback from Westminster)

"When resubmitting it must be much clearer to authors that they need to attach their manuscript file with tracked changes.

It must also be clear that authors are required to submit a (separate) “response to reviewers” in which they explain how they have responded to each comment made by each reviewer. It should not be possible to complete resubmission without at least a revised manuscript and a “response to reviewers”. It would help if “response to reviewers” were a defined file type (alongside “manuscript file” etc).

There needs to be a check box to confirm all changes have been made by the author."

Note: having something along the lines of 'Revision settings' in addition to review settings might be an option here? I know that currently, JW does flag if you haven't provided responses to reviewers / note to editor / no new version - but it isn't a hard block like with a required field. Nor can it be customised to be a file upload, rather than comments. I am not sure about the checkbox, personally, but I could see potential value in having a Revision settings page that provides some settings.

(I do remember seeing an editor simply return an immediate 'revisions required' verdict when an author hadn't done revisions as requested, which would be the alternative. But it creates more work for eds.)

Start by reviewing the existing revision workflow and its current checks for responses to reviewers, notes to editors, and new manuscript versions. Done should be defined by a decision on whether to add configurable revision settings, with a hard block for the required revised manuscript and response-to-reviewers file if that option is chosen, plus any agreed confirmation checkbox.