31. Separate Editorial Profile Copy from Protected Facts

Status

Accepted for the MVP working model; exact field matrix and approval/locking UI remain open.

Context

The Editor role may publish ContentEntry directly, while Psychologist has scoped self-service and Admin owns operational data. A psychologist profile combines narrative copy with credentials, professional facts, ServiceOffering, and availability; treating all fields as generic CMS content would let an editor unintentionally change booking/trust-critical data.

Decision

Split profile ownership by field class:

• Editor may manage narrative/public copy such as bio wording, article/FAQ content, and presentation text, and may publish those ContentEntry fields directly.
• Psychologist may propose/edit allowed fields in their own profile and availability according to RBAC; they cannot alter protected credentials or bypass operational rules.
• Admin controls credentials, approved professional facts, ServiceOffering, availability publication/locks, and protected profile field publication.

Changes to protected fields are not ordinary editor CMS publishes; they are operational actions with audit metadata.

Consequences

Positive:

• direct editor publishing remains fast without weakening professional fact control;
• booking availability and service data have clear ownership;
• profile trust signals are protected from accidental copy edits;
• field-level authorization becomes explicit.

Costs and constraints:

• UI/API needs a field matrix rather than one broad profile permission;
• some profile changes may need two-step proposal/approval;
• audit records must distinguish editorial vs protected changes;
• content and profile entities need clear boundaries.

Open follow-up

List profile fields by class, decide psychologist self-edit fields, define admin approval/lock behavior, and specify whether narrative edits can mention protected facts without structured validation.