ACL Consistency between content ref and source

Use case:

• page only available to root.
• root make a content ref of a published main_content to another page (available to all editors - e.g. John).
• There is no warning that there will be a conflict of ACL between the source and the destination
• John can not access the source page and content BUT he can access to the staging content from the content ref.
• John can initiate a workflow on the content ref, but not on the content source (correct as it does not have any privilege on the source). However he can compare the two versions (live and staging - staging being only available on the source).

To be consistent, I would only load the live published version of a content ref for users who can not access to the source (excepted via the "privileged" role which should grant a right only on "published" elements in the authoring environement)

From a similar manner the "Edit Source" action in the action menu should be grey-out or hidden.

If there is no live published content from the source yet an empty placeholder to signal the content ref and make it clickable could be added.

Finally in the content picker (edition engine of the content ref), the title of the source object should be the one published (and not the one still in staging and unapproved)