Multi-role document review system and method

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of document review, and provides a multi-role document review system and method. The review system comprises a review role system management module which is used for setting roles of participants in a review activity and respectively and correspondingly dividing operation authorities; the review activity process management module is used for dividing process stages of a review activity; the comment-based opinion management module is used for correspondingly opening the operation functions of creating, editing, deleting and closing review opinions according to the operation authority corresponding to the role of the operator; and the review activity information management module comprises a review activity information display unit and a review search query unit which are respectively used for storing and displaying related information of a plurality of review activities, so that an operator can search and screen the related information of the corresponding review activities. Through the review system, a user can efficiently query and manage a plurality of review activities, the review process is perfected, and the document review efficiency is improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of document review, and in particular to a multi-role document review system and method. Background Art

[0002] Digital transformation is a popular development direction at present. In order to ensure product quality and improve labor efficiency, various industries and fields of society are gradually shifting from the traditional offline working mode to the mode of working through online digital systems. The R&D and manufacturing industry is a typical representative of digital transformation. In the process of product development, the technical outputs of its R&D activities such as demand, design, and process need to go through review activities to ensure the quality of R&D and avoid rework in the later stage. There are many problems with the traditional offline review method, such as the time cost of appointment review members, paper cost of material printing, and inconvenience in querying meeting records after archiving. The paperless review system based on the digital system can effectively coordinate document authors and review team members, support the efficient promotion of review activities, and improve the efficiency of querying review information after the meeting.

[0003] However, the current paperless review system has many deficiencies in document review. For example, the current paperless review system only supports the execution process of a single review, lacks a way to manage information on multiple review activities, making it difficult for users to quickly locate the target review activity; the current paperless review system's method of defining the position of comments by file line number is inefficient and requires prior file parsing and user manual operations; the current paperless review system has limited participating roles and does not cover all key roles in the review activity, such as the person in charge and auditor of the review activity; the current paperless review system's review process is incomplete, lacking coverage of the entire process from the submission of review comments to the completion of document modification and the closure of the review activity.

[0004] It can be seen that the current paperless review system has many inconveniences in document review, which affects the efficiency and completeness of document review. Summary of the invention

[0005] In view of this, the embodiment of the present invention provides a multi-role document review system and method to solve or partially solve the above problems. Through the system, users can efficiently query and manage multiple review activities, clarify review role responsibilities, improve review processes, and improve document review efficiency.

[0006] In a first aspect, an embodiment of the present invention provides a multi-role document review system, comprising: The review role system management module is used to set the roles of the participants in the review activities and divide the operation permissions accordingly; The review activity process management module is used to divide the process stages of the review activity, which include review initiation, readiness check, review, opinion collection, modification, and closing stages in sequence; An annotation-based opinion management module is used to enable the creation, editing, deletion and closing of review opinions according to the operating permissions corresponding to the roles of the operators; The review activity information management module includes a review activity information display unit and a review search query unit. The review activity information display unit is used to store and display relevant information of multiple review activities, and the review search query unit is used for the operator to search and filter relevant information of corresponding review activities.

[0007] According to a specific implementation method of an embodiment of the present invention, the roles in the review role system management module include authors, review experts, review team leaders, and auditors; the authors record review-related information, upload files to be reviewed, complete the initiation of review activities, and modify documents based on the opinions of experts; the review experts make comments on the files to be reviewed and define the types of review opinions; the review team leader controls the process flow of review activities, checks the accuracy of review initiation information, summarizes the opinions of review experts, verifies, and closes review activities; the auditors make comments on the documents to be reviewed and supervise the behavior of review experts, review team leaders, and authors in the review activities.

[0008] According to a specific implementation method of an embodiment of the present invention, in the review activity process management module, in the review initiation stage, the author fills in the basic information of the review, creates a review team, and uploads the files to be reviewed; in the readiness check stage, the review team leader checks the review information, and enters the reviewing state after confirming that it is correct; in the reviewing stage, the review experts, review team leader, and auditors view the documents online and put forward their opinions; in the opinion summary stage, the review team leader summarizes the opinions and verifies them; in the modification stage, the author modifies the document according to the opinions, and the review experts, review team leader, and auditors check the rectification and close the opinions; in the closing stage, the review team leader closes the review activity and records the review conclusions.

[0009] According to a specific implementation method of an embodiment of the present invention, the annotation-based opinion management module is applied to the three stages of reviewing, opinion summarizing, and modifying; through the annotation-based opinion management module, in the reviewing stage, the review team leader, review experts, and auditors put forward opinions through online document annotations, the annotation-based opinion management module captures annotation creation, editing, and deletion events, and synchronously updates the review opinion data; in the opinion summarizing stage, the review team leader summarizes the review opinions, adjusts the opinion type, and removes invalid opinions; in the modifying stage, the author modifies the document according to the opinions, the review experts, review team leader, and auditors check the rectification and close the opinions, and before the opinions are closed, the author can repeatedly modify and submit the document.

[0010] According to a specific implementation of an embodiment of the present invention, the review activity information display unit displays review activity data attributes in a table form, including review number, review name, review project, review team leader, review status, and review conclusion; According to a specific implementation manner of an embodiment of the present invention, the review search query unit realizes the positioning of the target review activity based on a parameter screening mechanism and a multi-dimensional attribute search service.

[0011] In a second aspect, an embodiment of the present invention provides a review method based on the above review system, comprising the following steps: S1: Review initiation stage: S1.1: The author triggers the review initiation control to display the review basic information configuration form; S1.2: Fill in the basic information of the review, including the review name, review content description, review project, etc. S1.3: Create a review team and set up the roles of reviewers, including authors, review team leaders, review experts, and auditors; S1.4: Upload the documents to be reviewed; S1.5: Submit the form, and the multi-role document review system generates a unique review number to complete the initiation of the review activity; S2: Readiness check phase: S2.1: The review team leader inquires about the target review activity and checks the review form; S2.2: The review team leader checks whether the document is accurate in the system; S2.3: If the review team leader confirms that the review information is correct, the control process enters the next stage; S3: Under review: S3.1: The review expert views the document online in the multi-role document review system; S3.2: The review expert creates review opinions in the multi-role document review system by annotation; S3.3: The review experts confirm that they have completed the review of the document and submit their review opinions; S3.4: The review team leader reviews the completion status of the review experts and urges those who have not completed the review activities as soon as possible. During this period, the review team leader and reviewers can also create and submit review opinions; S3.5: When the time reaches the expected node or more than a certain number of experts have completed the review, the review team leader controls the process to enter the next stage; S4: Opinion collection stage: S4.1: The review team leader checks the expert opinions through the annotation list of the document; S4.2: The review team leader shall modify the corresponding review type for the review opinions that are not filled in or the type is inaccurate; S4.3: The review team leader shall delete any redundant or inappropriate items in the review opinion; S4.4: After completing the summary of opinions, the review team leader controls the system to enter the next stage; S5: Under revision: S5.1: The author searches the system for the location of the comments and the content of the document problem based on the comments; S5.2: The author completes the revision of the document according to the review comments; S5.3: The author uploads the rectified file in the system; S5.4: The review experts, auditors, and review team leaders review the newly uploaded files and close the comments that have been rectified. The multi-role document review system records the person who closed the comments and the time of closing. If the comments are not closed, the author can submit the file again until all comments are rectified; S5.5: The review team leader closes the review activity and records the conclusion of the review; S6: Closing phase: S6.1: After entering the closed phase, the review activity is in read-only state, and all members cannot modify the content of the review activity; S6.2: The multi-role document review system automatically collects the process information of the review, generates an information record sheet for the review, and supports downloading.

[0012] According to a specific implementation of an embodiment of the present invention, the review record table includes: 1) Basic information of the review, including review name, project, review number, and review execution time; 2) Information on the document being reviewed, including file name and version; 3) Review team member information, including the name of each role member; 4) Summary information of review opinions, including the content of the review opinions, the person who made the opinions, the location of the opinions, the type of opinions, the person who closed the opinions, and the time when the opinions were closed. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0013] In order to more clearly illustrate the specific embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following is a brief introduction to the drawings required for the specific embodiments or the description of the prior art. In all the drawings, similar elements or parts are generally identified by similar reference numerals. In the drawings, the elements or parts are not necessarily drawn according to the actual scale.

[0014] Figure 1 A structural block diagram of a multi-role document review system provided by an embodiment of the present invention is shown; Figure 2 A schematic diagram of the review role system in an embodiment of the present invention is shown; Figure 3 A schematic diagram of the review activity flow in an embodiment of the present invention is shown; Figure 4 A diagram showing an opinion management mechanism based on annotations in an embodiment of the present invention is shown; Figure 5 A schematic diagram of review activity management search and screening in an embodiment of the present invention is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0015] The following embodiments of the technical solution of the present invention are described in detail in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. The following embodiments are only used to more clearly illustrate the technical solution of the present invention, and are therefore only used as examples, and cannot be used to limit the protection scope of the present invention. It should be noted that, unless otherwise specified, the technical terms or scientific terms used in this application should have the common meanings understood by those skilled in the art to which the present invention belongs.

[0016] Figure 1 A structural block diagram of a multi-role document review system provided by an embodiment of the present invention, see Figure 1 The multi-role document review system includes a review role system management module, a review activity process management module, an annotation-based opinion management module, and a review activity information management module. The functions of each module are as follows: The review role system management module is used to set the roles of participants in the review activities and divide the operating permissions accordingly.

[0017] In order to fully cover the review business, the participants of a complete review activity should include the document compiler, the review opinion proposer, the review activity leader and the review activity auditor. In this system, the role names are defined as author, review expert, review team leader and reviewer. Figure 2 As shown in the figure, the responsibilities of the review role system members in the review activities are as follows: a) Author: The author is the initiator of the review activity. The main activities during the review process include initiating the review activity and editing and modifying the document. The main task of this role is to modify the document based on the expert opinions to ensure the quality of the document. The author has the following responsibilities in the system: 1) Record information related to the review, including the review name, project, etc., upload the files to be reviewed, create a review team, and complete the initiation of the review activity.

[0018] 2) Modify the document based on the opinions of the experts.

[0019] 3) Submit the revised document. If the expert believes that the revision requirements are not met, the author needs to revise the document again and resubmit it until the comments are all revised as required.

[0020] b) Review experts: Review experts are the main business participants in the review activities. They are generally composed of members from the technical fields involved in the document content and related supporting business fields such as economics. They provide opinions on the document from technical and non-technical perspectives and define the types of review opinions. After the author completes a round of rectification based on the review opinions, the review experts determine whether their opinions have been rectified. If not, they notify the author to continue to improve until they meet the requirements and then close the opinions. Review experts have the following responsibilities in the system: 1) Read the document content, make review comments, and clarify the type of review comments.

[0021] 2) Review the revised document and check whether the author has completed the rectification based on the review comments.

[0022] c) Evaluation Team Leader: The review team leader is the person in charge and controller of the review activities. He is responsible for verifying the correctness of the review activity information, summarizing it, and verifying the rationality of the review expert opinions. This role controls the entire review process. When the current stage is completed, the system turns to the next stage. When an abnormality occurs in the review activity, the review activity can be terminated at any time. The review team leader has the following responsibilities in the system: 1) Control the process flow of review activities.

[0023] 2) Check the accuracy of the review initiation information.

[0024] 3) Summarize and verify the opinions of the review experts.

[0025] 4) Close the review activities at any stage and define the completion status of the review activities.

[0026] 5) The review team leader may assume the responsibilities of a review expert and provide comments on the document.

[0027] d) Reviewer: The reviewer is the supervisor of the compliance of the review activities. This role can notify the author of the document by making comments or communicating with the review team leader and review experts through replying to comments, and put forward opinions on compliance, quality audit and other aspects from the perspectives of document content or review process, and urge relevant personnel to make adjustments (such as making adjustments when summarizing opinions) to ensure the high quality of the review process. The reviewer has the following responsibilities in the system: 1) Provide technical, quality audit, compliance and other opinions on the documents to be reviewed.

[0028] 2) Supervise the behavior of review experts, review team leaders, and authors during the review activities, and urge the correction of non-conforming items.

[0029] The review activity process management module is used to divide the process stages of the review activity. The process stages include review initiation, readiness check, review, opinion summary, modification, and closing.

[0030] like Figure 3 As shown, the steps of activities in each stage are as follows: a) Review Initiation: Step 1: The author of the document triggers the review initiation control as the initiator, and displays the review basic information configuration form.

[0031] Step 2: The initiator fills in the basic information of the review, including the review name, review content description, review project, etc.

[0032] Step 3: The initiator creates a review team and sets the review activity author, review team leader, review expert, and auditor. Members of each role cannot be repeated. The review team leader can only select a unique user, and the other three roles can select multiple users.

[0033] Step 4: The initiator uploads the file to be reviewed.

[0034] Step 5: The initiator submits the form, and the system generates a unique review number to complete the initiation of the review activity. The review activity enters the Ready Checking state.

[0035] b) Readiness check: Step 1: The review team leader queries the target review activity, checks the review form, and checks the basic information of the review activity, review team members, etc.

[0036] Step 2: The review team leader checks the system to see if the document is accurate.

[0037] Step 3: If the review team leader confirms that the review information is correct, the control process enters the reviewing state; if the information is abnormal, the review activity is rejected, and the initiator of the review is asked to modify the basic information and enter the readiness check state again.

[0038] c) Under review: Step 1: The reviewer views the document online in the system.

[0039] Step 2: Review experts create review opinions in the system by annotating, filling in additional information such as opinion type, opinion location, opinion source, etc. During the review process, they can edit and delete their own opinions.

[0040] Step 3: The reviewer confirms that he / she has completed the review of the document and submits his / her review opinion. After that, the reviewer cannot modify or add review opinions.

[0041] Step 4: The review team leader reviews the completion status of the review experts and urges those who have not completed the review activities as soon as possible.

[0042] Step 5: When the time reaches the expected node or more than a certain number of experts have completed the review, the review team leader controls the system to enter the opinion summarizing state.

[0043] Among them, the review team leader and reviewer can both put forward review opinions.

[0044] d) Summarizing opinions: Step 1: The review team leader reviews the expert opinions through the annotation list of the document.

[0045] Step 2: The review team leader shall modify the corresponding review type for the review opinions that are not filled in or the type is inaccurate. The types of opinions should include technical defects and non-technical defects.

[0046] Step 3: The review team leader deletes redundant or inappropriate items in the review opinion.

[0047] Step 4: After completing the summary of opinions, the review team leader controls the system to enter the modifying state.

[0048] e)Under Modification: Step 1: The author searches the system for the location of comments and the content of the document problem based on the annotations.

[0049] Step 2: The author completes the revision of the document based on the review comments.

[0050] Step 3: The author uploads the corrected file in the system.

[0051] Step 4: The person who proposed the opinion (mainly the review expert, but also the reviewer and the review team leader) reviews the newly uploaded file and closes the opinions that have been rectified. The system records the person who closed the opinion and the time of closure. If the opinions have not been rectified, the review closure operation cannot be performed. During the revision stage, if the opinions are not closed, the author can submit the file again until all the opinions have been rectified.

[0052] Step 5: The review team leader closes the review activity and records the conclusion of the review. The conclusion may include conditional approval (need to be modified according to the review opinions), approval (no modification required), etc.

[0053] f) Close: Step 1: After the review activity enters the closed stage, the review activity is in read-only state and all members cannot modify the content of the review activity.

[0054] Step 2: The system automatically collects the process information of the review and generates an information record sheet for the review, which can be downloaded by review team members. The review record sheet includes: 1) Basic information of the review, such as review name, project, review number, review execution time, etc.

[0055] 2) Information about the document being reviewed, such as file name, file version, etc.

[0056] 3) Review team member information, including each member’s role and name.

[0057] 4) Review opinion summary information, including the content of the review opinion, the person who made the opinion, the location of the opinion, the type of opinion, the person who closed the opinion, the time when the opinion was closed, etc.

[0058] The comment management module based on annotations is used to enable the creation, editing, deletion and closing of review comments according to the operator's role and the operating permissions of teammates.

[0059] Annotation-based opinion management mechanism Figure 4 As shown in the figure, the whole life cycle of creating, editing, deleting and closing the review opinions is realized. This mechanism takes effect in the three stages of review, opinion collection and modification in the review activity process. The following is an explanation based on the review activity stages.

[0060] a) During the review phase: During the review stage, the review team leader, review experts, and auditors are the main participants who put forward review opinions, covering the creation, editing, and deletion links in the opinion management mechanism. The specific contents are as follows: 1) The system supports online presentation of documents, and users can manage opinions by annotating documents.

[0061] 2) When creating a review opinion, click the target location of the document to be reviewed, add a document annotation, the system captures the annotation creation event, and creates an entry for the review opinion data in the system data.

[0062] 3) The system supports users to edit comments and other additional information, including the type of opinion, the source of the opinion, and the location of the opinion. When the above content is modified, the system captures the modification event and synchronously modifies the review opinion content and related additional information.

[0063] 4) The system supports users to delete comments. When comments are deleted from a document, the system captures the deletion event and simultaneously deletes the review comments and related additional information.

[0064] 5) The system supports collaborative review. Users can see comments added by other users in the document, but can only edit and delete comments they created.

[0065] b) Opinion collection stage: In the stage of opinion summary, the review team leader summarizes the opinions put forward by the review experts, and adjusts the type of opinions and removes invalid opinions according to the actual business situation. This process covers the editing and deletion links of the management mechanism, and the specific contents are as follows: 1) For review opinions that do not have the review opinion type filled in or the opinion type is inaccurate, the review team leader can edit the corresponding opinion type.

[0066] 2) For unreasonable or invalid opinions, the review team leader can delete the comments and delete the opinion data simultaneously.

[0067] c) Under revision: During the revision stage, the author modifies the file according to the expert's opinion and uploads the adjusted file. Afterwards, the review expert checks the newly uploaded file to check whether the author has completed the rectification according to the review opinion. If the rectification is completed, the review expert can close the corresponding opinion, and the system will also record the information of the person who closed it and the closing time. If the opinion is not closed, the author can submit the file again until all opinions are rectified.

[0068] The review activity information management module includes a review activity information display unit and a review search and query unit. The review activity information display unit is used to store and display relevant information of multiple review activities, and the review search and query unit is used for operators to search and filter relevant information of corresponding review activities.

[0069] The review activity information management service mainly provides two business functions: review activity information display and review search query to support users' efficient query.

[0070] a) Display of information on review activities; a.1: The system displays data information of multiple review activities in the form of a table. The contents of the table attributes are shown in Table 1:

[0071] a.2: Review activity table design pager, support data paging selection, provide the following functions: 1) Display the total number of pages of current data.

[0072] 2) Supports displaying and modifying the total number of data on each page of the current table.

[0073] 3) Supports displaying the current data page number and supporting modification of the current data page number.

[0074] 4) Support inputting the target page and displaying the data within the target page number.

[0075] a.3: The review information record table displays different operations based on the current review status of the review activity and the role of the user. The operations of each review role are shown in Table 2. The first vertical column represents the review role, and the second horizontal row represents the stage of the review process.

[0076]

[0077] b) review search queries; like Figure 5 As shown, the review search query service is implemented based on a parameter screening mechanism and a multi-dimensional attribute search service.

[0078] b.1: Parameter screening mechanism, which uses parameters that can clearly define the type dictionary as the implementation screening, specifically including the following: 1) Based on the completion status of the review activities, they can be divided into agency reviews and completed reviews.

[0079] 2) Based on the user's review role, the review can be divided into four categories: the user presides over the review as a review team leader, the user reviews as an expert, the user audits as a reviewer, and the user participates as an author.

[0080] b.2: Business attribute search mechanism, through the business attributes in the basic information of the review activity, fuzzy or precise matching is performed to achieve the positioning of the target review. The specific content is as follows.

[0081] 1) Use the review name, review number, and name of the file to be reviewed as search parameters for fuzzy matching.

[0082] 2) Accurately match the specific business information of the review, such as searching with project name or review team leader user as parameters.

[0083] b.3: The parameter screening mechanism and the business attribute search mechanism can take effect at the same time, and the relationship between the two is calculated using the "AND" logic.

[0084] It should be noted that the modules are arranged in a stream layout, which is only one embodiment of the present invention. Other arrangements may also be adopted, and the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0085] The present invention discloses a multi-role document review system based on annotations, including: a review activity search and query service with multiple parameters and a role-based operation authority mechanism; an opinion management mechanism based on document annotations, covering the entire life cycle process of review opinion creation, editing, deletion, and closing; a review role system including authors, review team leaders, review experts, and auditors; and a review activity process that integrates review information verification, review opinion management, author modification, and information aggregation activities.

[0086] The embodiments of the present invention have the following technical effects: (1) In the aircraft, automobile, shipbuilding and other R&D and manufacturing industries, a large number of review activities will be generated during the product R&D and design process. On the one hand, the present invention provides efficient query services through multiple search dimensions such as review name and review status to help users quickly locate the participating reviews. On the other hand, the system provides corresponding functional operations based on the user's role in the activity and the current review stage, thereby improving the efficiency of the review activity execution.

[0087] (2) At present, office documents are mostly in word or pdf file formats. Both types of files have annotation functions, so the present invention has high adaptability. File annotations can directly display the location and content of review comments on the file, and can also display a list of comments in batches. By clicking on the list, you can jump to the target comment with one click. The present invention uses annotations as the basis for comment management and provides users with convenient comment management capabilities.

[0088] (3) The present invention provides efficient online collaboration capabilities between review experts and between authors and review experts. During the review stage, review experts can not only see and process their own review opinions in the document, but also view the opinions created by other experts simultaneously, avoiding the duplication of similar opinions. The present invention has designed a method in which the author can view all opinions and modify the document in the system, and then the expert can confirm and close the opinions in the system, saving time for offline communication between users.

[0089] (4) The role system designed in the present invention is responsible for the preparation and adjustment of documents in the review activities, the submission of review opinions and rectification supervision, the progress control of the review activities, and the audit and inspection of the activities, which comprehensively covers the document review business. The review team members have clear division of labor and perform their respective duties, which can promote the coordinated operation of the review activities.

[0090] (5) The present invention designs a review activity process, which covers multiple activities including review activity initiation, review of review information readiness, opinion management, modification preparation, and review closure. This process enables review team members to fully participate in the business process, realizes the review of review information accuracy, the full life cycle management of review opinions, the correction and confirmation of document content, and the collection of review activity process data, thus ensuring the high-quality execution of review activities.

[0091] An embodiment of the present invention also provides a review method based on the above-mentioned multi-role document review system, the method comprising the following steps: S1: Review initiation stage: S1.1: The author triggers the review initiation control and displays the review basic information configuration form; S1.2: Fill in the basic information of the review, including the review name, review content description, review project, etc. S1.3: Create a review team and set up the roles of reviewers, including authors, review team leaders, review experts, and auditors; S1.4: Upload the documents to be reviewed.

[0092] S1.5: Submit the form, and the multi-role document review system generates a unique review number to complete the initiation of the review activity; S2: Readiness check phase: S2.1: The review team leader queries the target review activity and checks the review form; S2.2: The review team leader checks the document in the system to see if it is accurate; S2.3: If the review team leader confirms that the review information is correct, the control process enters the next stage; S3: Under review: S3.1: Review experts view documents online in the multi-role document review system; S3.2: Reviewers create review opinions by annotation in the multi-role document review system; S3.3: The review expert confirms that he / she has completed the review of the document and submits the review opinion; S3.4: The review team leader reviews the completion status of the review experts and urges those who have not completed the review activities as soon as possible. During this period, the review team leader and reviewers can also create and submit review opinions; S3.5: When the time reaches the expected node or more than a certain number of experts have completed the review, the review team leader controls the process to enter the next stage; S4: Opinion collection stage: S4.1: The review team leader reviews the expert opinions through the annotation list of the document; S4.2: The review team leader shall modify the corresponding review type for the review opinions that are not filled in or the type is inaccurate; S4.3: The review team leader shall delete any redundant or inappropriate items in the review opinion; S4.4: After completing the summary of comments, the review team leader controls the system to the next stage; S5: Under revision: S5.1: The author searches the system for the location of the comments and the content of the document problem based on the comments; S5.2: The author completes the revision of the document based on the review comments; S5.3: The author uploads the rectified file in the system; S5.4: Review experts, auditors, and review team leaders review newly uploaded files and close comments that have been rectified. The multi-role document review system records the person who closed the comments and the time of closure. If the comments are not closed, the author can submit the file again until all comments have been rectified. S5.5: The review team leader closes the review activity and records the conclusion of the review; S6: Closing phase: S6.1: After entering the closed phase, the review activity is in read-only state, and all members cannot modify the content of the review activity; S6.2: The multi-role document review system automatically collects the process information of the review and generates an information record sheet for the review, which supports downloading.

[0093] The review record form includes: 1) Basic information of the review, including review name, project, review number, and review execution time; 2) Information on the document being reviewed, including file name and version; 3) Review team member information, including the name of each role member; 4) Summary information of review opinions, including the content of the review opinions, the person who made the opinions, the location of the opinions, the type of opinions, the person who closed the opinions, and the time when the opinions were closed.

[0094] The detailed functions of each module and unit in the above method embodiment are consistent with those in the above system embodiment and will not be repeated here.

[0095] Each embodiment in this specification is described in a related manner, and the same or similar parts between the embodiments can be referenced to each other, and each embodiment focuses on the differences from other embodiments.

[0096] The above is only a specific embodiment of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any changes or substitutions that can be easily thought of by a person skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention shall be subject to the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A multi-role document review system, characterized in that: include: The review role system management module is used to set the roles of the participants in the review activities and divide the operation permissions accordingly. The roles include author, review expert, review team leader, and auditor; The review activity process management module is used to divide the process stages of the review activity, which include review initiation, readiness check, review, opinion collection, modification, and closing stages in sequence; An annotation-based opinion management module is used to enable the creation, editing, deletion and closing of review opinions according to the operating permissions corresponding to the roles of the operators; The review activity information management module includes a review activity information display unit and a review search query unit. The review activity information display unit is used to store and display relevant information of multiple review activities, and the review search query unit is used for the operator to search and filter relevant information of corresponding review activities.

2. The multi-role document review system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The author records information related to the review, uploads the files to be reviewed, initiates the review activities, and modifies the documents based on the opinions of the experts; the review experts give opinions on the files to be reviewed and define the types of review opinions; the review team leader controls the flow of the review activities, checks the accuracy of the review initiation information, summarizes the opinions of the review experts, conducts verification, and closes the review activities; the reviewer gives opinions on the documents to be reviewed and supervises the behavior of the review experts, review team leaders, and authors during the review activities.

3. The multi-role document review system according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the review activity process management module, during the review initiation phase, the author fills in basic review information, creates a review team, and uploads the files to be reviewed; In the readiness check stage, the review team leader checks the review information and enters the reviewing state after confirming that it is correct; During the review stage, the review experts, review team leaders, and auditors view the documents online and provide comments; During the opinion summarizing stage, the review team leader summarizes the opinions and conducts verification; during the modifying stage, the author modifies the document according to the opinions, and the review experts, review team leader, and auditors check the rectification and close the opinions. Before the opinions are closed, the author can modify and submit the document repeatedly; during the closing stage, the review team leader closes the review activities and records the review conclusions.

4. The multi-role document review system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The annotation-based opinion management module is applied to the three stages of review, opinion summary and modification; through the annotation-based opinion management module, in the review stage, the review team leader, review experts and auditors put forward opinions through online document annotations, the annotation-based opinion management module captures annotation creation, editing and deletion events, and synchronously updates the review opinion data, in the opinion summary stage, the review team leader summarizes the review opinions, adjusts the opinion type, and removes invalid opinions, and in the modification stage, the author modifies the document according to the opinions, and the review experts, review team leader and auditors check the rectification and close the opinions.

5. The multi-role document review system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The review activity information display unit displays review activity data attributes in a table format, including review number, review name, review project, review team leader, review status, and review conclusion.

6. The multi-role document review system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The review search query unit realizes the positioning of the target review activity based on the parameter screening mechanism and the multi-dimensional attribute search service.

7. A review method using the multi-role document review system as described in any one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: S1: Review initiation stage: S1.1: The author triggers the review initiation control to display the review basic information configuration form; S1.2: Fill in the basic information of the review, including the review name, review content description, and review project; S1.3: Create a review team and set up the roles of reviewers, including authors, review team leaders, review experts, and auditors; S1.4: Upload the documents to be reviewed; S1.5: Submit the form, and the multi-role document review system generates a review number, completing the initiation of the review activity; S2: Readiness check phase: S2.1: The review team leader inquires about the target review activity and checks the review form; S2.2: The review team leader checks whether the document is accurate in the system; S2.3: If the review team leader confirms that the review information is correct, the control process enters the next stage; S3: Under review: S3.1: The review expert views the document online in the multi-role document review system; S3.2: The review expert creates review opinions in the multi-role document review system by annotation; S3.3: The review experts confirm that they have completed the review of the document and submit their review opinions; S3.4: The review team leader reviews the completion status of the review experts and urges those who have not completed the review activities as soon as possible. During this period, the review team leader and reviewers can also create and submit review opinions; S3.5: When the time reaches the expected node or more than a certain number of experts have completed the review, the review team leader controls the process to enter the next stage; S4: Opinion collection stage: S4.1: The review team leader checks the expert opinions through the annotation list of the document; S4.2: The review team leader shall modify the corresponding review type for the review opinions that are not filled in or the type is inaccurate; S4.3: The review team leader shall delete any redundant or inappropriate items in the review opinion; S4.4: After completing the summary of opinions, the review team leader controls the system to enter the next stage; S5: Under revision: S5.1: The author searches the system for the location of the comments and the content of the document problem based on the comments; S5.2: The author completes the revision of the document according to the review comments; S5.3: The author uploads the rectified file in the system; S5.4: The review experts, auditors, and review team leaders review the newly uploaded files and close the comments that have been rectified. The multi-role document review system records the person who closed the comments and the time of closing. If the comments are not closed, the author can submit the files again until all comments are rectified; S5.5: The review team leader closes the review activity and records the conclusion of the review; S6: Closing phase: S6.1: After entering the closed phase, the review activity is in read-only state, and all members cannot modify the content of the review activity; S6.2: The multi-role document review system automatically collects the process information of the review, generates an information record sheet for the review, and supports downloading.

8. The review method according to claim 7, characterized in that: The review record form includes: Basic review information, including review name, project, review number, and review execution time; reviewed document information, including file name and file version; review team member information, including the name of each role; review opinion summary information, including review opinion content, opinion proposer, opinion location, opinion type, opinion closure person, and opinion closure time.

Images