By ThePixelMines on

I've been searching for a way to accomplish this, but I can't seem to find the right combination to make this work.

Goal: As part of an intranet, our Human Resources Dept. needs a policy content type that each user can "sign" or acknowledge they have read it (with a checkbox or something of the like). All employees must "sign" (or check) every policy. HR will need a way to review employees that have not signed every policy.

What I've tried so far:

  1. Signed Nodes - This module seems to be incomplete. I couldn't find anyway to reference its values in Views. The module hasn't been updated in 2 years.
  2. Flags - I added a flag to the policy content type, but can't figure a way to tie the policy, USER, and flag together to show who hasn't completed ALL policies. I was thinking I could compare the total number of all policies with the number of those flags each USER has and list USERs where the numbers don't match. Again, I can't figure a way to tie them all together in a VIEW.

Second Goal: Remove all signatures when a new revision is published. I assume this can be accomplished with the Revisioning Module and Rules.

I'm hoping someone has accomplished something similar and can point me in the right direction. TIA.

⋅ Categories: Drupal 7.x

Comments

zeezhao’s picture

zeezhao commented

Also have a look at:
https://www.drupal.org/project/acknowledgements
https://www.drupal.org/project/entity_legal

But it sounds like you might be able to do it with flags too, probably a view to show users without flag on any of the policy content types. To make it easy maybe also create the view with an argument to pick existing policy docs, then find those without flag.

ThePixelMines’s picture

ThePixelMines commented

Thanks, zzezhao. I'll report back.

ThePixelMines’s picture

ThePixelMines commented

A huge thanks for your quick and accurate response, zeezhao. Sign for Acknowledgement does exactly what I was hoping. Entity Legal was more for site TOS than a per node system I needed.

Also, it turns out I didn't need Rules to use with Revisioning, which is robust enough on its own.

Thanks, again!

Edit: Typo