Feature Request/Idea: Classify metadata fields as mandatory, recommended, and optional #6885

[philippconzett]

Overview of the Feature Request
As an installation admin, I'd like to be able to classify metadata fields as mandatory, recommended, and optional in any sub-dataverse (as opposed to the current two choices of mandatory and optional fields). Mandatory and recommended fields should pop up at the initial step of creating a dataset. The possibility to classify metadata fields as recommended and make them appear in the first round of metadata registration would make it much easier to get depositors filling in these fields.

What kind of user is the feature intended for?
Sysadmin, Superuser, Depositor

What inspired the request?
Currently, our curators often have to make depositors aware of there being other important metadata fields than the mandatory ones.

What existing behavior do you want changed?
The fact that currently only mandatory (and a few other) metadata fields are displayed in the first round of metadata registration.

Any brand-new behavior do you want to add to Dataverse?
Yes, the feature request introduces a new option of classifying/prioritizing metadata fields.

Any open or closed issues related to this feature request?
IQSS/dataverse#6885

[DS-INRAE]

This is also frequently asked at our installation by collection administrators.
In addition to the issue, I'd be interested to know how others currently deal with recommended metadata.
In our case we indicate them in our metadata guides, though it's a mouthful for users and we are yet to publish the other metadata blocks than citation. For some recommended metadata fields we also "highlight" them via the installation's default template.

[DS-INRAE]

Closed related issue on the template level for recommended metadata :

• Set Required, Hidden & Optional Metadata Fields At the Template Level  dataverse#2177