Combine / disambiguate _access and access_right

[fenekku]

2 parts to this task: discuss the differences / combination and implement.

access_right can currently be:

• 'open'
• 'embargoed'
• 'restricted'
• 'closed'

'_access' can be:

    'metadata_restricted': <true|false>    
    'files_restricted': <true|false>

This leads to strange combinations: an open access record with files restricted or a record with metadata restricted but files not restricted or an open record with metadata restricted... The first in particular is something participants in our usability sessions have complained about: "An open access record should have its files available" to paraphrase.

What also makes things hard to keep straight is that we have a rights field (the license) and an access_levels field.

Because of this, I suggest we merge them together. This way, only combinations that make sense are possible and the combinations are not across different fields but within 1 field. We can always have the UI reflect what we want from this 1 field. Enforcing a strict semantic we can cover most cases (I think?) with something like the following for example:

New "access_right" field	metadata available?	files available?
open	✔️	✔️
embargoed	✔️	❌ until embargo date (unless user has permissions)
scheduled (or embargoed with added metadata)	❌ until embargo date (unless user has permissions)	❌ until embargo date (unless user has permissions)
restricted	✔️	❌ (unless user has permissions)
closed private	❌ (unless user has permissions)	❌ (unless user has permissions)

I am completely fine with having access_right be bibliographic AND "interpreted" metadata.

What are your thoughts @lnielsen @ppanero ?

[UPDATED 2019-12-20]

[github-actions]

This issue was automatically marked as stale.

[lnielsen]

Separate issues have been opened for the access implementation