Add Quality Checklist metadata block for CAFE collection

[Saixel]

Adds the Quality Checklist custom metadata block for the CAFE collection.

This metadata block includes 4 quality check questions to confirm that submissions include:

• CAFE Recommended README Template completion
• Data dictionary documentation
• Extracted Data Collection Submission Guidelines compliance
• Supporting artifacts (screenshots, technical documentation)

Implements #406

[jggautier]

Hi @Saixel. Thanks for asking me to review. Could you write a bit about what you'd like me to review? I think that might help me know what to focus on.

[Saixel]

Hi @Saixel. Thanks for asking me to review. Could you write a bit about what you'd like me to review? I think that might help me know what to focus on.

Hi @jggautier. Nothing specific, don't worry. Since these are metadata-related changes, I'm tagging you in case you want to take a look or if I miss anything.

[jggautier]

Ah thanks. In your list of next steps, there's an "adjust per feedback" checkbox. Is this referring to feedback from the folks from the CAFE team? Is there a way for me to learn about that feedback?

[Saixel]

The feedback I am referring to is about the copies (descriptions) @jggautier
The ones that were decided upon are the ones I have applied

[jggautier]

Ah got it, thanks.

Could you check out the Guidelines for tooltip text section of the Dataverse metadata text guidelines? We made it to help folks who are creating and maintaining metadata blocks. I'm anxious to see how well the guidelines help.

[qqmyers]

I think the technical issues have been resolved, so I'll approve.

From a usability perspective, I wonder:

• are the very long titles useful? Is it OK how they look in facets? It also seems odd for the popup descriptions, which are usually giving more information, saying instead to "See description above for more information." (where "description" means the text in the title field.) I wound have expected something more like "Includes README in required format" or "Includes complete Data Dictionary"
• should these be displayOnCreate fields? They seems to be more about final checks which would be things you can't attest to when creating the dataset (although "pending" is an option)? Given that there is a "Pending" option, should they be required fields? (Isn't not entered the same as pending?)

In both cases, it's up to the CAFE team what it wants and these are easy to change later if desired, so no reason to hold things up.

[cmbz]

2026-02-25: We've connected with the CAFE team, and they are fine with the long titles. They have no plans to turn on faceting, so that shouldn't be a problem.

[qqmyers]

Should the metadablock mark the fields as not facetable then?

[cmbz]

@qqmyers yes, I think that's totally fair here.