Split off the right Link from Delete/Move for Scorm Modules and other objects

If you need any help in filling out this wiki page, please visit our ILIAS Community FAQ. And please complete the metadata information in the right column after having created the page.

1 Initial Problem

For saving HD capacity and keeping the track and usage of particular (Scorm) learning modules, the feature "Link" of a Scorm module is very helfpull. Unfortunately there is no dedicated right to be given to an user. The right "Link" is direct connected with the right "Delete/Move". But, in most cases the user should not be allowed to delete a learning module, but of course, to link it to various other positions, e.g. courses. 

Connecting the right "Delete" with the right "Move" of an object is, from a logical perspective, understandable. Connecting "Delete" with "Link" is not.

(RBAC - Settings of a Role)

2 Conceptual Summary

A) Please introduce the separat right "Link" for the object "Scorm Learning Module" into the RBAC. 
B) Remove the right "Link" from the right "Delete" of a Scorm Learning Module.

3 User Interface Modifications

3.1 List of Affected Views

• Global/local Role templates: Position "Scorm Learning Module":  "User can link Scorm Learning Modules"
• Global/local Roles

3.2 User Interface Details

{ For each of these views please list all user interface elements that should be modified, added or removed. Please provide the textual appearance of the UI elements and their interactive behaviour. }

3.3 New User Interface Concepts

{ If the proposal introduces any completely new user interface elements, you might consult UI Kitchen Sink in order to find the necessary information to propose new UI-Concepts. Note that any maintainer might gladly assist you with this. }

3.4 Accessibility Implications

{ If the proposal contains potential accessibility issues that are neither covered by existing UI components nor clarified by guidelines, please list them here. For every potential issue please either propose a solution or write down a short risk assessment about potential fallout if there would be no solution for the issue. }

4 Technical Information

{ The maintainer has to provide necessary technical information, e.g. dependencies on other ILIAS components, necessary modifications in general services/architecture, potential security or performance issues. }

5 Privacy

{ Please list all personal data that will need to be stored or processed to implement this feature. For each date give a short explanation why it is necessary to use that date. }

6 Security

{ Does the feature include any special security relevant changes, e.g. the introducion of new endpoints or other new possible attack vectors. If yes, please explain these implications and include a commitment to deliver a written security concept as part of the feature development. This concept will need an additional approvement by the JourFixe. }

7 Contact

• Author of the Request: Ralf Schröter / KPG (ralf.schroeter@kroepelin-projekte.de)
• Maintainer: {Please add your name before applying for an initial workshop or a Jour Fixe meeting.}
• Implementation of the feature is done by: {The maintainer must add the name of the implementing developer.}

8 Funding

If you are interest in funding this feature, please add your name and institution to this list.

• …

9 Discussion

10 Implementation

{ The maintainer has to give a description of the final implementation and add screenshots if possible. }

Test Cases

Test cases completed at {date} by {user}

• {Test case number linked to Testrail} : {test case title}

Privacy

Information in privacy.md of component: updated on {date} by {user} | no change required

Approval

Approved at {date} by {user}.